Morgan: 61-39

Nobody believed the size of Labor’s lead in last week’s Morgan poll, but it’s now widened further, from 60.5-39.5 to 61-39. Both parties are down fractionally on the primary vote, Labor from 54 per cent to 53.5 per cent and the Coalition from 36 per cent to 35.5 per cent. For what it’s worth, the balance has gone to the Australian Democrats, up from 0.5 per cent to 1.5 per cent. This was a face-to-face poll with 894 respondents.

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.

377 comments on “Morgan: 61-39”

Comments Page 5 of 8
1 … 4 5 6 … 8

  1. the tactic seems to be “there, look how bad the polls are, isn’t JWH sooo clever not to have called the election!

  3. ummm
    clover last time i looked was Lab

    damien j
    Firewall ??

    tad more information
    AA demographic
    45+
    semi-socialite
    apparently phone hook up over weekend (kings group loom large methinks)

  4. [the tactic seems to be “there, look how bad the polls are, isn’t JWH sooo clever not to have called the election!]

    I think it just shows how bored everyone is – mainstream media included – that the election still hasn’t been called.

  7. Gusface @ 203

    Firewall: see Possum Comitatus’ Crikey analysis of the MarkTextor “Federal state of Play – Oz Track 33” from last month where in the Government implements strategies to limit losses rather than to win the election. Clover ain’t Lab. Should be in one though. Not quite with you on the other stuff, old boy.

  8. [204- When does boredom turn to fustration, then to anger. A very dangerous game indeed.]

    When it does you can be assured Howard will call the election the next day. 😛

    Maybe he will try for some legislative stunt when parliament resumes? You know get on TV campaigning against refugees bringing HIV to the country or something. He’s tried everything else.

  10. fred. Absolutely not. All preference deals involve an element of risk. This one didn’t come off, but on the information available at the time it was done, it was a justified risk and a correct decision. If the calculation of risk this time seems to indicate again that such a deal would maximise Labor’s chances, then the deal should be done.

  11. 208-what a pity if stunt turns out looking like a “senior moment”. JWH is looking more like a figure of fun each day, tonights effort of “I’m going to watch the football this weekend” indicates he is developing a “tin ear” as well.

  12. Assuming that January 19th is the last date by which an election has to be held, what is the last date by which it has to be called? I am asking this because it appears to me that JWH and his crew sense that the jig is up and are hanging out for very last drop of the taxpayers’ blood before they head out into the sunset. That, and the chance to slop out large amounts of public funds to their cronies in the media via the so-called “information” ads and other commitments that an incoming government would not be able to disentangle to be spent in ways that are useful to the nation.

  14. 209- I thought of that too, but requiring the return of the tear-off coupon at the bottom of the how to vote card.

  19. I would like to see optional preferential voting introduced. With one stroke the Liberals would damage Labor’s chances of winning in marginal seats on Green preferences.

    Prob with Labor is that they will gladly take Greens prefs (lets face it, how many marginals would you get if the Greens had optional preferential as a tool), but will gladly deal with religious fundo’s in the hope of getting some of their measly 1% vote.

    In 2004, Labor betrayed their voters by preferencing Family First, Same as the Democrats (what a great club to be in). And Adam’s arrogance in saying “we will do whatever deal to win a seat”shows how arrogant he is. As arrogant as any Liberal.

  20. [And Adam’s arrogance in saying “we will do whatever deal to win a seat”shows how arrogant he is. ]

    Only the impotent remain pure.

  21. 219 – Although I agree with (In 2004, Labor betrayed their voters by preferencing Family First). I don’t think optional pref would make much difference. Greens might as well be supporting Libs if thats the case.

  22. adam@210

    what that calculated risk did was breathe life into a religious conservative Party with no breadth of mainstream appeal whatsoever.

    that calculated risk should not have been taken by an Australian Labor Party.

    you can argue all you like but the Australian Labor Party should not be playing footsie with FFP until they prove they have even a minute mainstream, non assemblies of god, following.

    Let the conservative side play with them.

  24. [ I would like to see optional preferential voting introduced ]

    What would that do to seats where there are both National and Liberal candidates?

  26. Adam @ 100: I could see that the ALP agreeing with the mill decision would help keep socially-conservative working-class types around (while opposing it vociferously might very well lose some). I really can’t see their me-too changing votes towards them that they didn’t already have.

  27. [Gimme a break “only the impotent remain pure”.

    OK quoting Whitlam didn’t work, what about James Carville? “Don’t get angry, get elected.”

  28. You lot can expostulate all you like. Real political parties have to deal with political reality as you do not.

    Paul #224 – that’s why it won’t be introduced. It would do Labor some damage in inner city areas, but it would be fatal for the conservatives in three-cornered contests, as it has been in Qld.

  30. On the way to work today an abc radio commentator said the reason John Howard is delaying the election is because he is terrified of what the outcome might be, especially losing jis own seat.

  31. anthony, I didn’t mean to suggest that Labor supported the mill *solely* for electoral reasons. We support jobs for Tasmanian workers, and if a pulp mill can be operated in an environmentally sound way, of course we support it.

  34. Damien J.. Right on!
    What it’s done is reduced me to the tedium of voting below the line in the Senate. How could I have trusted Steven Conroy?

  35. Mmm. I don’t know. After the last 2 elections, I’d seriously have to question the deal-making skills of the Victorian ALP. Sure, they made a judgement call in both cases, but in both cases they ended up backfiring. No matter which way you look at it, a Family First senator and a DLP member of the Victorian upper house is less likely to vote with the ALP than a Green.

    Of course, there’s also a fair amount of animus against the Greens in the Victorian ALP. Their anti-Green campaigns in places like Melbourne, Northcote and Richmond were hilariously over-the-top. I sincerely hope that this doesn’t drive them into making another stupid preference call this time.

  36. 227 – You preach to me about political reality? I’m a middle class male in his 40s. I feel like walking around with a target on my shirt. I live the results of your game playing every day of my life. Step out of the ivory tower, brother, and live the consequences of these lunatic strategems.

  38. Adam: I don’t think anyone who’s read about the foul state of politics in Tasmania w.r.t. Gunns (I’m talking about both parties here) is under any illusions about how the mill will be operated. It may start off being run according to the agreement, but that will change as soon as it’s possible for Gunns to make more money.

  39. Adam @ 91:

    Have to agree with you there. It isn’t the raw number in this poll which would be most disconcerting for the government, but rather the reversal of the “fightback”/ “narrowing” trend which a lot of th emsm were touting about 3-4 weeks ago, especially the GG.

    Last week’s and this week’s Morgan ties in, trend wise, with Newspoll and Galaxy going the wrong way for the government.

    Just hoping the trend on election night is enough,and we’re not having a Don’s Party election.

  41. The thrilling news coming from this poll is that it converts in (Antony’s calculator) to a narrow loss for His Imperial Highness, Lord Alexander Downer-Tweedle Rowbotham of Mayo and Springfield (aka ‘Billi Bunter’).

    Too good to hope for ….?

  42. Changing the subject, does anyone have an opinion about the Govt vs Telstra stoush in terms of vote-changing? Personally, I’m happy to see both sides lose, but as Tim Dunlop pointed out, it’s a bit much for the Govt to encourage business groups to run pro-Workchoices ads and then complain about a business running ads against them.
    From a business point of view, Telstra’s obviously decided that the ALP are more likely than not to win. If the Coalition does get back, Sol and his pals are going to be in a world of hurt.

  43. [ Real political parties have to deal with political reality ]

    Very true. All this talk about purity, betrayal and never surrendering your core beliefs makes me wonder what some people think politics is about. We used to fight wars to decide governments, now we leave the weapons alone and fight elections instead. Politics is a battle for power. It’s as simple as that. Political parties aren’t churches pledged to keeping true to commandments brought down from the holy mountain by some political Moses. Elections are bloodless wars and if you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Both the Libs and Labor will make what ever deals they have to in order to get elected.

  44. Paul Kelly proposes that Howard’s policy platform is the new consensus, the new Australian settlement. If that is the case, why are Australians on the virge of getting rid of him?

    Kelly has a habit of using the word “paradigm” a lot. He always wants to interpret changes in politics as symptoms of huge shifts in Australian society. He doesn’t understand that sometimes voters have just had enough of one person, and they want someone else. Australians are cynical and apathetic voters we aren’t trying to structure new paradigms. Sometimes enough is enough…

    You wait if Rudd wins, he will be off writing new essays saying how significant it is having a P.M. who was a diplomat, and some guy from QLD who’s parents voted for the Country party. He will turn political analysis into political biography to figure out what the Rudd paradigm means.

    It won’t make any of it true.

  45. [ Politics is a battle for power.]

    That’s what Whitlam’s quote means – parties that don’t change and adjust their beliefs will be ineffective, and will never attain power.

  46. You will have to pardon my bluntness of this subject. I’ve been having this argument with people on the self-righteous left for three years and I’m pretty sick of it. The Greens are a political party, and their whole political strategy is based on taking votes and seats from Labor. Well, we aren’t going to let them, OK? Why should we? We reformed the Vic upper house (out of the goodness of our hearts, no-one made us do it), so that they got the representation their vote entitled them to, and no more. If they want more seats they can win more votes, not expect us to deliver them for them. Anyway, I would much rather have the DLP holding the balance in the upper house than the Greens – the DLP is a centre party and on most issues is pro-Labor, apart from their hobby horses like abortion. Kavanagh votes with Labor in the upper house more than the Greens do. The Greens will always try to drag us to the left, and that way lies defeat.

  47. Paul Kavanagh, glad to see you. Could you ask your party’s webmaster or webmistress to take down that truly scary photo of your good self which currently graces your website, and put up the names of the Democrat lower house candidates for the election (of which I assume you will be one)?

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 5 of 8
1 … 4 5 6 … 8