Advertiser Boothby poll

Adelaide’s Advertiser newspaper today carries a slightly curious poll of voting intention in Boothby, held for the Liberals by Andrew Southcott on a margin of 5.4 per cent. Conducted by phone from a sample of 649, it shows Southcott leading Labor candidate Nicole Cornes by an improbable 49 per cent to 32 per cent after distribution of the undecided. No two-party result is provided, but commenter Matthew Sykes has transcribed the paper’s large volume of generally unilluminating data from the poll throughout the previous comments thread. No doubt the Advertiser’s pollsters do their best, but my mind is drawn back to the final week of the state election campaign last March, when it ran a poll showing the Liberals neck-and-neck in Norwood and set to retain Hartley. Labor went on to win the seats with respective margins of 4.2 per cent and 4.6 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.

516 comments on “Advertiser Boothby poll”

Comments Page 10 of 11
1 9 10 11
  1. 443
    Lindsay voter Says:
    September 28th, 2007 at 8:41 am
    No time to check if this has already been posted. The Oz has resurrected this poll and you can still vote, about Wayne Swan as Treasurer.,25197,22073824-5013404,00.html

    These polls are of course meaningless in that they are too easily manipulated by anybody with the patience and the will. If they tied them to a persons IP number then it would be much more difficult for people to multiple vote and I think one of the other Murdoch papers does that.

    They are also meaningless as they are really only polling the political persuasion their on-line readers and reflects the views of that demographic.

    To use them as the basis of a story would be fairly poor work.

  2. Morgan F2F have been quite erratic over the past few months

    before this always high 50s…
    56.5/43.5 (15/16 Sept)

    The last phone poll was 21/22/ August 60/40.

    So you could get a 55/45 and be none the wiser as the next one might be 59/41.

    All year their has been this correlation between Newspoll and the others where Morgan F2F had always seemed a few points higher. The last Newspoll and Galaxy should tell us this Morgan should be around 58/42. But then Morgan did go erratic. MOE?

  3. For Morgan I’d like to see whatever result will get John Howard to call the election as soon as possible. 25/75 (ALP/Coalition) please.

  4. Kina, you’re using the actual preferences of electors here, rather than the 2004 based preferences, which Morgan uses in his headline figures. I think the only real outlier there was the 54.5-45.5 end August poll; it could be that Morgan re-arranged his weighting to get closer to Newspoll, etc.

  5. Unless there is a big swing to the coalition Morgan is rarely commented in the MSM. I maybe wrong but I think Crikey comments on Morgan. No leaks that I know of. I find on the Morgan site or this site.

  6. I can’t believe it took so long for the media to actually get Howard to answer what would happen if he won his seat but the Coalition lost the election. Now he has refused to rule out retiring. I also read on the GG website that Howard is basically stuck in Syd, especially Bennelong, while Rudd is doing a world wind tour through marginals all over the country. Obviously this might chance once the campaign has officially started, but it’s ground that he will have to make up and Rudd can easily go back to the marginals after Howard has been to them.

  7. BTW, GetUp only needs another $20K to reach their new $200K target and if they get that the ad will be shown in regional areas over the weekend.

  8. The GetUp! fundraiser is phenomenal. They’ve raised $5k in the last 50 or so minutes. There are some state Liberal branches that could only dream of such largesse.

  9. Today’s Oz editorial: “Howard is struggling in the polls … because he appears to have little idea of what to do next.” And: “It (the government) is starting to look like a mob that doesn’t deserve to be considered. It must pull together, put its hand up and say something worth listening to.”

    Well, well. Setting the scene for glowing praise after Howard’s next big pronouncement.

    The editorial will go something like this: “At last the government has its act together and has come up with a far-reaching and bold plan for the future … blah, etc.”

  10. Pity GetUp can’t get its ad into WA – all slots are taken. What are the chances of anyone swapping their advertising time with them for the resultant publicity? Halls of power people?

  11. “It (the government) is starting to look like a mob that doesn’t deserve to be considered. It must pull together, put its hand up and say something worth listening to.”

    Honestly, if a government of 11 years can look like that with all the resources both financial and intellectual they have access to then it truly is a clueless mob. With all the natural advantages of encumbancy they still appear like they dont deserve to be considered then they have to be useless.

  12. A Liberal candidate in NSW advises me: “the Liberal Party is doing their best to finalize all their seats for the up-coming Federal Election. I think by next week every seat should have a candidate.” They said that a month ago, but I guess they must be close by now.

  13. Rudd has said it all year long, Howard only cares about this election and won’t worry about what happens 10-20 years down the track. It was a clever ploy, rather than attacking his age, he attacked Howard on not looking to the future. I heard Howard specially say after the whole leadership thing, the Coalition had to sort out policies for the next 3 years, i.e. just enough to get to the next election. It’s not very ‘aspirational’ now is it? Even Howard’s climate change policies won’t really start until after the following election, so we waste 3 years and they will campaign at the next election on policies they announce this election.

  14. This weekend’s for footy, not politics –

    Footy legends Tommy Raudonikis and Peter “Crackers” Keenan have joined a Labor campaign against a federal government advertising blitz during grand final weekend.

    Each ad run during the AFL grand final on Saturday will cost taxpayers $135,000, while similar ads during the National Rugby League grand final on Sunday will cost $92,000, Labor says.

    No wonder the election hasn’t been called, Howard wants all the free advertising he can get. And we end up paying top dollar for it all too.

  15. Re. the Tommy Raudonikis and Peter “Crackers” Keenan radio adds:

    I don’t know much about Crackers Keenan (other than the fact that he’s crackers), but I do know a thing or two about Tommy Raudonikis.

    Memo to Coalition types: never – repeat never – get involved in a stoush with Tommy Raudonikis; there will only ever be one victor. The loser will always walk away wishing that they’d never come into contact with the old Newtown and Western Suburbs warhorse.

    A peed of Tommy Raudonikis is a sight (and sound) to behold.

  16. Who cares if Labor try and create a bandwagon effect. Are they seriously trying to argue that Labor shouldn’t be trying to convince people to vote for them? How dare they!

  17. RE: Raudonikis and Kennan:
    What an absolute master stroke from the ALP – all political allegiances aside, that is super-sharp campaign thinking. Can you imagine how peoples ears are gonna prick up when they hear two of the most familiar and distinctive voices in football bagging the Government for wasting our money?

  18. The Age reports:

    Howard may quit sooner

    Prime Minister John Howard has refused to rule out quitting politics if he wins his seat of Bennelong but his government loses this year’s election.

    At last!!! I can never understand how long the MSM journos take to ask the obvious questions. Howard claims to stay no matter what. Then says as long as Coalition is in Govt he will eventually go to backbench when handing over.

    The obvious question was always: What do you do if you win your seat but lose Govt.?


    So this was always an own goal. Bennelong voters might as well vote for Maxine to cut out the middle man and avoid the high likelihood of a by-election.

  19. Once again, the best thing about a Dennis Shanahan piece is reading all the derogatory comments directed at him in the comments section below.

  20. Optimist i think its highly dubious to be attacking the Government for Commonwealth advertising when Keating did exactly the same thing in the lead up to 1996…face it incumbent Governments State and Federal can and will continue to do this regardless of what party is in power. If you want to complain about this i could just as easily point out the millions of dollars worth of ACTU advertising that only benefited the ALP who payed nothing for those biased pieces of work but no because thats a fact of life as is Governments using advertising money in an election year to get people to see what they’ve been doing….

  21. Glen how little you know or how quickly and conveniently you forget the very recent past:

    On September 5, 1995, six months before voters made him Prime Minister, John Howard issued a statement as leader of the opposition. It said, in part: “In a desperate attempt to find an election life raft, the prime minister [Paul Keating] is beginning an unprecedented propaganda blitz using taxpayers’ money. This soiled government is to spend a massive $14 million of taxpayers’ money over the next two months as part of its pre-election panic. If the full communications barrage runs its course it could reach $50 million …

    “This grubby tactic will backfire.

    “Taxpayers will see through it. They don’t want their money wasted on glossy advertising designed to make the prime minister feel good. Keating is about to boost government promotion to a massive new high. It’s time a brake was put on this fraud. There is clearly a difference between necessary government information and blatant government electoral propaganda. Now the government is going to use taxpayers’ money on a disgraceful scam.

    “In any other business, the shareholders would revolt and throw out the management which wasted their money. The problem for the government is not communication. The problem is that it is tired, it has broken too many promises, it has hurt too many people. This propaganda blitz will make the electorate feel even more angry.”

    Do you support Howard or not Glen? Is he right or worng?

  22. Yes, but Glen, most people wouldn’t be paying too much attention to government advertising most of the time (not least because they are poor ads). But when people are bombarded with these ads during the two most watched telecasts of the year, they might well notice them. Consequently, Labor using legendary footy players to bag the government during the same ad breaks seems like good tactics to me.

  23. Couldn’t give a flying about a bunch of hyped-up thuggees prancing around with a football – circus for the masses. Pleeeese, can this thingy be sport free. No doubt Rattus will most the most of it. Really gets up my snout.

  24. Of course i support Howard and he is right to do this because if Labor were in they’d be doing exactly the same thing…

    Pauline your argument is baseless because Howard did the same thing in 1998, 2001, and 2004 just as all the State Labor Governments did the in the lead up to their elections and they won those…i’m afraid you’re going to need to find a better argument because yours falls at the first hurdle my dear lady.

  25. 468
    Call the election please Says:
    September 28th, 2007 at 11:26 am
    Who cares if Labor try and create a bandwagon effect. Are they seriously trying to argue that Labor shouldn’t be trying to convince people to vote for them? How dare they!

    Wasn’t this the same bandwagon effect both Howard and the press tried to create with the last Newspoll, until Galaxy spoiled the party? AND the basis of their bandwagon was? The poll change suggested they would only get thrashed, not obliterated.

  26. ‘He hit me first’ doesn’t wash with this one Glen. Take a level of abstraction to your approach, and deny there are not ethical concerns with either party at any level spending taxpayer money in this way. Regardless of who wins, I hope this becomes more of an issue and is regulated in some way.

  27. Shame Glen that you can read english but not understand the meaning of words and sentences.

    Read Howard’s words again and try to understand the meaning and only then should you come back and discuss these and other topics with the adults.

    Are you a kid? How old are you?

  28. Using taxpayers’ money for electoral propaganda is grubby, corrupt and deplorable – whoever is doing it. Labor has done it and will do it again. The coalition are taking it to a new low.

    Hopefully it will blow up in their faces.

    Hopefully the next government will make it illegal (as if…)

  29. An interesting character sketch of Julia Gillard from Heather Ridout in today’s The AFR Magazine October edition (reported at page 27):

    “I sort of feel that she actually taps into Australian values and I think she
    is quite media savvy. I know when she speaks to business she speaks
    very moderately and business gets disappointed when the outcome
    isn’t so moderate. She’s quite ‘there’ in terms of public opinion and
    she probably is a divisive character in some ways, but she’s popular”.

    This might bring a cheer from the Gillard admirers on this blog. Appraisals of a leading figure on one side of politics that are given from a person on the ‘other side’, such as Ridout, are, in my estimation, more often than not going to be closer to the mark about the true qualities of the person under appraisal. It is also a timely reminder to this blog that those on the ‘other side’ are not extremists. They just see things differently to you.

  30. KT,
    I enjoy those many Shanahan comments also. I have a feeling that my contribution from this morning is unlikely to make it in so I thought I’d repost it here……..this was in response to Shanahans “article” and the torrent of criticism that usually follows.

    “People please, you should all stop telling little Denny how much of an embarrasment he is to the once-proud profession of journalism. You need to understand the psychology at play here. Someone like Dennis has been cheerleading conservatives for so long and rationalising his appalling bias for so long now that he has built a very firm defensive wall in his own mind. If you keep bashing away at that wall by pointing out how shameless his bias is, you will get one of two results. The first would be no change, nor recognition, and an obvious unwillingness to engage in debate for fear of acknowledging that there is substance to such a charge. The other possible outcome is that Dennis’ defensive wall comes crashing down around him – all that would achieve would be the quiet mental self-destruction of a man consumed by an insulated self-delusion. Ultimately, that would do nothing for the state of Australian journalism at all – at the end of the day, this is about ego. The irony is that people like Dennis built their egos through the awe and respect that some (less critical) Australians provided him (and the profeesion) with during his early “career” – a time when journalists were generally worthy of some respect due to the important role they played in our democracy. The irony is that it is that ego that allows Dennis to rationalise his deliberate decision to ignore the howls of SHAME that greet most of his articles. Perhaps the most embarrasingh aspect opf this problem is the fact that Dennis seems quite determined to continue with his shameless Government cheerleading, yet feels he needs to hide behind news limited editors as they defend him in a series of nasty, nameless editorials. A very sad state of affairs that i pray time will solve for us.”

  31. Pauline you think Labor is so high and mighty that they wouldnt be doing the same thing if they were in Government god you must be childish to think so ignorantly my dear lady…its the hypocrisy of politics…Rudd may bang on about advertising being immoral and propaganda but if he’s ever in power do you honestly think he wouldnt do exactly as Howard is doing…you’d have to have rocks in your head to assume he wouldnt do the same…

    And Pauline no i am not a kid i am an adult and i act like one on this blog unlike some people who make childish remarks assuming anybody supporting the Liberal Party has to been a kid because they’d be so stupid…that doesnt wash with me dear lady and i believe that once you attack people on baseless childish name calling i think you’ve lost your argument.

  32. Any word on Morgan poll?

    Pauline. I asked in another thread if Glen was a kid, but then thought probably not. His level of debate is down there with the standard-issue lib minister.

  33. Arguments saying ‘the other side will do it, so we’ll do it too’ are just childish. I’d like to think we’d all demand both sides of politics don’t waste tax-payers money.

    Of course, some ‘information campaigns’ are genuine, but definately not most of them. Also, if we’re looking at efficiency and effectiveness of the use of taxpayers’ funds I’d argue that such high cost advertisements as during the grand finals are not value-for-money.

    You have to wonder how the Coalition will be able to object to Labor using tax-payer funded ads should they be elected, and they will eventually. They’re setting the bar pretty high.

    In any case this debate has little to do with psephology.

  34. @ 481 David Charles Says:

    Appraisals of a leading figure on one side of politics that are given from a person on the ‘other side’, such as Ridout, are, in my estimation, more often than not going to be closer to the mark about the true qualities of the person under appraisal.

    Because why would your enemies lie about you?

  35. So Glen, it is all right for any future Labor government or any present Labor government to be spending tax payers money to be re- elected?

  36. CTEP
    “You have to wonder how the Coalition will be able to object to Labor using tax-payer funded ads should they be elected, and they will eventually. They’re setting the bar pretty high.”

    You are right but the ALP have done the same thing as the Coalition in State elections and Federal Labor did it in 1996…so i dont see why Rudd is justified in complaining about it…i had to sit through dozens of Victoria Ads just about how good Victoria is and then ads about Water from Bracks i thinks its highly dubious for any side to make political points out of advertising because they all do it and they are all hypocrites.

  37. Of course but i doubt they help Governments get elected Gary in the end if they are blatantly political or have no informative message then they’ll have more harm than good. Now unless you are going to blanket ban State and Federal which would damage the Government’s ability to inform people about major policy changes that are going to have a big impact on peoples lives like IR, GST, Super i think its a catch 22 you dont like Governments doing it but if they cant tell the people about massive policy changes they arent doing their jobs.

  38. Pauline i never said Howard was a hypocrite there is a difference between advertising that is non-political and informative about policies that wont have any effect on the election and blatant propaganda which is what Keating engaged in…if you are going to call anyone hypocrites my dear lady you should be looking at all your State Premiers who have done worse than Howard…i sat through dozens of ads saying how good Victoria was from the State Government said nothing informative and in SA Mike Rann appears on State Government ads go figure Pauline….

  39. Glen – “and i believe that once you attack people on baseless childish name calling i think you’ve lost your argument.” I hope you remember these words Glen from now on. I won’t do it but I could quote many a post from you where you “lost your argument” through name calling. A lesson learned maybe? One can but hope so.

  40. No sooner do I make a sarcastic comment about the NSW Liberals’ missing candidates, than they are announced – most of them anyway.

    * John La Mela, Barton
    * Mark Majewski, Blaxland
    * Lindsay Paterson, Charlton
    * Colin Fowler, Cunningham
    * Daniel Caffery, Grayndler
    * Krysia Walker, Newcastle
    * Lily Arthur, Prospect
    * Ronney Oueik, Reid
    * Philip Mansour, Watson
    * Rose Torossian, Fowler (not at the NSW Libs website yet, but I know she is running)

    Still missing: Banks, Shortland, Sydney and Werriwa, plus Batman and Scullin in Vic.

    If anyone knows any occupational details about these candidates, please let me know. As in the state election, the Lebanese community is obviously the source of last resort for candidates in unwinnable seats (Oueik, Mansour and Torossian).

  41. So if you are Keating or a Labor Premier you are a hypocrite and if you happen to be Howard doing the same thing, it is different, better, worthy and beyond reproach and criticism.

    Glen you are a kid with naive propositions like that.

    Don’t waste any more time debating this please.

  42. “Under the Federal Labor plan, all government advertising and information campaigns in excess of $250,000 will need to be vetted by the Auditor-General. The Auditor-General would independently apply rules which limit public advertising to essential requirements for public information.

    This information will need to be based on policy that has been given explicit legislative and regulatory approval. We’ll also work with the states to develop the same kind of approach around the country.

    This is about lifting the standards of government integrity, so taxpayers can have more confidence that their government is working in the public interest, rather than a purely political interest.

    Think of all the good things we can do for Australia’s future with the money we save.”

    Penny Wong.

    Glen do you agree with this Labor Policy?

  43. Think I heard correctly. Howard on ABC wireless speaking on road funding. ” … roads go everywhere.” God, that’s news!

    Reminds me of Billy McMahon’s famous: “Everywhere I go, people know that something’s wrong ..”

  44. #485 John Withheld [Because why would your enemies lie about you?]

    Because those on the ‘other side’ like Ridout are adversaries to Gillard’s policy positions but they are not necessarily enemies unless personal hatreds come into play.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 10 of 11
1 9 10 11