After last week’s surprising poll from Boothby, today’s Adelaide Advertiser brings us a survey of 622 voters from Christopher Pyne’s seat of Sturt which is more in line with market expectations. It shows Pyne with a two-party lead of 52-48, pointing to a swing of around 5 per cent. Pyne is given a primary vote lead over Labor candidate Mia Handshin of 44 per cent to 35 per cent.
Mia is whittling away Pyne’s lead and she’ll be a credit to the labor party if she gets over the line, i was told she was offered an easier seat, but she refused wanting to go to the electorate she grew up in, if she doesnt gain the seat this time she’ll still eventually end up in Canberra and she’ll be the person to watch.
Is it too late to swap Ms. Cornes with someone else in Boothby?
Mia Handshin, trailing 48-52 in the Tiser poll for Sturt, was a former columnist for the paper and is treated positively in the daily. Nicole Cornes, apparently trailing 46-54 in the Tiser poll for Boothby, wrote for the Sunday Mail and is being savaged by the Tiser, which even botched its report of the Boothby poll. Yet given a margin of error of about 4 per cent, both seats could be in contention. Labor polling apparently has had both Handshin and Cornes ahead, at least until fairly recently.
Pyne is the Minister for Ageing. I believed he let slipped 2 months ago that he wish he was in another portfolio like foreign affairs, those old folks can be a drag. Sounds like a South Australian Liberal ‘born to rule’ wet dream. If Pyne dose not like his job he should resign his post & try serving his electorate better.
This poll if of measure of what is happening out there shows that this election is not a ‘given’. There is still a lot to be done if there is going to be a change of government.
Sturt is the seat I live in. I hope Handshin wins, other than Howard losing Bennelong, seeing Pyne retired from politics, and most likely working on the board of some aged care company would be great!
That primary vote figure doesn’t make much sense though. Last time the Labor candidate got 34.5% I can’t see how you can have a 5% swing, but only 0.5% of it as primary votes. Isn’t it more likely that some in the big mass of Liberal votes have jumped straight over to Labor because of Handshin and Rudd?
Even the Greens vote only improved by 1% compared to 2004. Unless a lot of those Greens preferences previously whent to the Liberals, and are only now going to Labor. But that would be rather unusual.
Entertaining to read the idiot asking why only 622 voters…
“Yet given a margin of error of about 4 per cent, both seats could be in contention. Labor polling apparently has had both Handshin and Cornes ahead, at least until fairly recently.”
Yeah, I think the most accurate thing to say about both seats is “it’s close”. Sturt & Boothby aren’t must wins for the ALP though, and winning either should be viewed as a nice bonus.
ShowsOn, i would’nt give much credence to the Advertiser’s polling, a pal working there is’nt very impressed with their ethics, i just wished a more respected poll could be done on a seat by seat basis.
As per Adam Carr: “Persons aged 65 and over: 17.4% (10th highest)”
Had Pyne known better, he could have used the portfolio to his political advantage.
I read the poll in the Advertiser and also found it confusing; I wonder if they reported it correctly? As someone else who lives in the electorate I agree both that Handshin is a good candidate and Pyne is quite beatable. I have rarely seen him in the electorate in recent months.
That being said I also agree on the reporting bias. The Advertiser, worst capital city daily in Australia, gave Handshin the most positive spin I have seen on any non-Liberal politician in years. The editor must have turned in his party membership card.
it’s so close in sturt that if pyne makes an idiot of himself like his team mates have this week it might just be enough to push the undecided towards handshin
i’ll be watching sturt on election night with interest and will be surprised if the winner is announced on the night
Look it is all over – Adam has called it.
[ShowsOn, i would’nt give much credence to the Advertiser’s polling, a pal working there is’nt very impressed with their ethics, i just wished a more respected poll could be done on a seat by seat basis.]
They don’t add up. If you see a 5% swing, you expect that to be substantially due to a shift in primary votes. But Handshin’s primary vote is essentially the same as at the 2004 election. That doesn’t make sense.
But anyway, this poll is basically a tie. Whichever party gains momentum during the election campaign itself will win this seat. It may be out of Pyne and Handshin’s control, it may just come down to whether the voters want Rudd or Howard / Costello as P.M.
[As someone else who lives in the electorate I agree both that Handshin is a good candidate and Pyne is quite beatable. I have rarely seen him in the electorate in recent months.]
I have NEVER seen him in my part of the electorate (Highbury).
Hey John of Melbourne (post no. 2) why are you so interested in Boothby when you are in Melbourne (apparently)? Not many people I know in Boothby would vote for that wet ineffectual rag Andrew Southcott…the bigger picture is to rid this nation of the most divisive morally bankrupt Government we have had the misfortune to endure & if it means voting for Nicole Cornes then we will. What is it to you? I have noticed other posts by you harping on about Boothby…….you don’t even live here.
I like her because she is pretty and if there were more Labor candidates like her then the most divisive morally bankrupt Government would be returned. I think the Coalition have done a great job.
A great job at being morally bankrupt? Please John, give it up if you don’t have anything real to contribute. It’s not funny in the slightest, nor is it good trolling.
waiting for http://www.roymorgan.com …
Morally bankrupt what a croc that just a state of mind and emotion not fact!
Sorry Socrates (10) you’re wrong. The worst daily newspaper in Australia is without doubt “The West Australian”, my local, which I haven’t paid for since they stitched up Carmen Lawrence, but I still browse when I’m at Maccas. I agree with you about Pyne, though. An uppity little twit. I personally believe he’s Downer’s little half-brother.
Good spin John of Melbourne – from the fingertips of an expert political media spin doctor perhaps? or should I preface that with “prior”? keep dreaming and focus on that electorate in Melbourne somewhere.
I thought the newspoll quarterly trends showed the swing to labor in SA to be around 10%.
Also, Possum’s excellect charts show the swing to be even greater in safe liberal seats like Sturt
Now, why would two SA seats in a row show up a swing of only 5% or less to labor?
Re comment #8 – Judy, I notice that the ’tiser doesn’t say who conducts their polling, so there’s probably grounds for seeking out ‘more respected’ polling. If the sampling were respectable, the margin of error in this poll would be over 3.9%. Combined with other data, such as the Newspoll quarterly results, it’s enough to indicate that Chris Pyne is in danger.
gotta say Cornes has copped a bollocking by local press, Tiser, compared to Handshin.
Handshin is former tiser journo, Cornes worked for Mail.
Both polls by Tiser have been written to suit story they wanted. Both extremely poor, with figures not adding up etc. Cornes had a swing to her on a 2PP in their poll even according to their dodgy figures but they still ran with the “Cornes holding Labor back story” as if she was losing ground. This in turn was taken as gospel by commentators and punters in city of churches.
Tiser has no credibility at all – best used for dunny paper.
Mr. Squiggle@21, because they’re commissioned by the extreme right wing rag The Advertiser thats why lol.
Shows On
Yeah, something is wrong with the figures, article says 12% of libs voters will now vote labor and 6% of labor now vote lib, this should have seen labor’s primary vote at 38%.
As for Cornes in Boothby, in the interests of fairness they should ask Southcott the lib opponent a couple of tough questions, he is on the Workplace committe.
Ask him does he agree with the 350,000 who were forced onto AWA’s under the first Work Choice laws not being subject to the fairness test, and why?
Is he concerned over the number of deaths of 457 visa workers from unsafe working conditions.
Which beach in Boothby would he like to see as the site for Howard’s promised Nuclear Power station, the one that is displayed on his website or another one nearby?
Is Morgan definately out today? If they were still making calls last night is that a quick turnaround for a poll today?
Ozymandias the West has been a lot worse since the changer in editorship circa 2002ish. It really is an absolute disgrace. They’ve been asked by the media standards advisor to apologise to the ALP on countless occasions when it’s come to light they have no evidence to back up some of their stories.
For what it’s worth, I’ve seen Advertiser polls in the past that have probably overstated Labor’s lead. For instance, polls showing Labor at 56/44 in certain SA seats prior to the 2004 election.
Nothing in today’s Crikey email about today’s Morgan. Crikey usually has the figures
Morgan is going to release something today
see: http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2007/4219/
Edward, I did not “call it”. I said Labor is leading at the moment, and I’m even you will concede that. I made no prediction. My prediction, if you want one, is that Labor will win unless Rudd makes some spectacular error during the campaign and/or Howard has a decisive win in the debates. Both are possible, but unlikely.
I think the most accurate thing to say about both these seats is that the ALP wont win either.
Regarding the lack of primary vote movements, that is because the primary vote does not exclude undecided. (which is pretty silly)
add 4 points to each primary (ie split the 8% undecided voters) and you get labor on 39 and liberal on 48. Not scientific i know, but I guess that shows that if the remaining undecideds split 50/50 pyne would need a very bad preference flow to not get over the line.
Thommo I’d accept that if you added the word ‘probably’.
Yeah your right there should be a probably in there.
I will repost this since it was buried in the previous thread:
In case anyone is interested the primary votes in the Advertiser Sturt poll are:
Liberal 44%, Labor 44%, Undecided 8%, Greens 7%, Democrats, Family First 2%, Independent, Informal, 1%. The 2PP is 52-48 to Liberal.
Whoops that should be:
Liberal 44%, Labor 35%, Undecided 8%, Greens 7%, Democrats, Family First 2%, Independent, Informal, 1%. The 2PP is 52-48 to Liberal.
The debate/s are going to be crucial this time around.
If Howard manages to bring Rudd down in them then I can see a significant turn around and a reinforcing and fleshing out of the ‘Rudd is all spin, no substance’ mantra.
I can’t see Rudd losing a debate to Howard though. Rudd is phenomenally good at being clever off the cuff.
I think he often comes across as a bit pompous and ineffectual in pre-written speeches, but his conversation and debating skills are excellent.
Compare and contrast Adam at 679 in previous thread:
“It’s pretty easy to find 16 seats where Labor is currently ahead. My list would be Parramatta, Lindsay, Dobell, Eden-Monaro and Page in NSW, La Trobe in Vic, Bonner, Moreton, Herbert and Blair in Qld, Hasluck in WA, Kingston, Wakefield and Makin in SA, Bass and Braddon in Tas and Solomon in NT. That’s 17. I could probably add Bennelong, Deakin, Bowman and Stirling, but I’m being conservative. Yes, they could all swing back, and yes a giant asteroid could plunge into Lake Burley Griffin. I don’t think either will happen.”
To Adam at 30 above
“Edward, I did not “call itâ€. I said Labor is leading at the moment, and I’m even you will concede that. I made no prediction. My prediction, if you want one, is that Labor will win unless Rudd makes some spectacular error during the campaign and/or Howard has a decisive win in the debates. Both are possible, but unlikely.”
As my ethics teacher likes to say That’s the call your having when your not having a call.
[As my ethics teacher likes to say That’s the call your having when your not having a call.]
“It’s pretty easy to find 16 seats where Labor is CURRENTLY AHEAD.”
CTEP (16) If you must admonish trolling, please be even handed about it. The post (14) to which John of Melbourne responded (15) was, itself, trolling.
Misty, the debates are never crucial. Notice how the consensus is that Howard lost the debates in 1998, 2001 and 2004 and still won the election?
Who watches the debate anyhow? People who mostly have made up their minds, probably the same people who watch budget speaches etc. Can you imagine Kath and Kim voters sitting down and watching Rudd and Howard talk for an hour? Hardly.
I don’t suspect Rudd will do well at the debate anyhow. In my opinion he’s a very weak off the cuff speaker and not very flexible in going off script. This is true of Howard as well of course, but I suspect he will have a slight edge on Rudd. Again though, I think the debate will be irrelevant.
David Charles, I don’t think so. It was merely asking him why he’s so interested in Boothby. A legitimate question. I’d suggest anyone can be interested in any seat they so choose.
However, if you can make sense out of John of Melbourne’s post then you’re obviously a wiser man than me! Perhaps I really am just missing something… but I’ve read it several times and just can’t make sense of it. Nor his post at (18). Moral bankruptcy is a state of mind and not fact? Huh?
I think Rudd is lucky hes debating Howard and not Costello.
Crikey lead today:
1. The Government 10+ points behind on its own polling
Christian Kerr writes:
Crikey understands that the Government’s internal polling has it lagging nationally by 10.6%. We are told of one safe seat with a buffer of almost 14%, where the swing against the government is currently running two points higher at 16%.
No Moggy figures but
[I think Rudd is lucky hes debating Howard and not Costello.]
I don’t think Costello’s constant yelling would work well as a TV debating style. He saves that for parliament, which hardly anyone watches. Plus, he requires the constant protection of a gutless speaker, which he wouldn’t get on TV.
Plus, I thought it was funny in the last sitting of parliament that Costello was attacking Rudd for not defending himself. Costello didn’t seem to see the irony that Costello was defending a Prime Minister who should’ve lead the debate for the government. Howard spoke (once), but only after Abbott crafted a motion stopping the opposition from taking points of order. The government took points of order almost constantly during Rudd’s TWO speeches to stop him from being heard.
During a TV debate, the leader of the government can’t hide behind stupid parliamentary rules.
Once he gets into a one-on-one debate, Howard seems to shift personas and become the sweaty-palmed bullied fellow that he has obviously been for much of his life. Remember the rediculous crane-like arm spread pleading that he was doing against Latham?
He is wooden and out of his depth when he doesn’t have the numbers behind him in anything resembling a level platform against someone his intellectual equal. I am surprised anyone thinks that his performances against Rudd, who has outmaneuvered hime all year, will be any different to his performances across the rest of his career.
“During a TV debate, the leader of the government can’t hide behind stupid parliamentary rules.”
And Rudd cant hide behind his script.
Debates –
I think the party’s are both so risk adverse and fearful of the knock-out blow that they essentially play defense in the hope of not losing rather than winning the debate.
The only way to “lose” in the debate is to do something which connects with an underlying belief – it would take something like Rudd crying in the debate or his bottom lip quivering. Cannot see it or to blow a question completely like Dukakis in the US in 1988 or Gerald Ford in 1976.
He has the embarrassing shoulder tic as well.
He’s so scared of the debates that he constantly tries to manufacture a platform that means he cant be whipped (hosted by Ray, a panel of distracting journos etc), that there is no chance of him winning well even if he could intellectually outpoint Rudd, which I think impossible.