Morgan face-to-face: 62-38

That Roy Morgan release discussed in the previous post has now been supplemented with data from last weekend’s face-to-face poll, and it shows a hard-to-credit blowout in the Labor lead to a “record” 62-38, from 57.5-42.5 the previous week. The Coalition’s primary vote is down from 39 per cent to 34 per cent, while Labor’s is up from 49 per cent to 54.5 per cent. The sample size was 990 compared with 552 from the phone poll.

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.

669 comments on “Morgan face-to-face: 62-38”

Comments Page 9 of 14
1 … 8 9 10 … 14

  2. ‘She has voted for Howard at previous elections.’ So has more than half the voting public at all but one of his victories, it isn’t a crime.

    In my eyes it is. To me it shows complete ignorance. For all we know if she hadn’t been named a candidate for Labor she may well have voted for Howard again.

  5. [206
    Marktwain Says:
    November 9th, 2007 at 8:55 pm

    ……..As someone who takes pride in my profession, even if the rest of the world thinks we journos should be eating worms with the pollies and the used car salesmen, I’m just the tiniest bit p#ssed off.]

    Sammy, at least you acknowledge that Shanahan has shredded his credibility and deserves the arse, and for that I dips me lid to yer.

  7. I have been trying to get a comment on Dennis Blog for hours, it keeps getting rejected for some reason. This fake car industry story should be one of the biggest scandals in the election Since the crap was actually front page nationally, if the retraction isn’t on the front page there will be all hell breaking loose.

    So far I have tried.

    “how’s the car industry Denniss?”

    “I agree Denniss, good article, how does this translate to the car industry”

    “what was it you said about labors IR policy and the car industry Denniss, I cant find the link”

    “have you quit due to embarrassment and that is why you wont post my comments Denniss?”

    if you dont know what i am on about check out possum.

  8. The fact that the car industry came out and said the story was false about their representations to the govt, indicates they think Rudd will win I believe.

  9. Ashley @ 392.

    You could also argue that her change in views are also representative of the change in heart the rest of the community is having if you’re to believe the polls.

    Sure. But I don’t want to vote for a sheep.

  11. Koala @ 389, the GG article on Morgan did mention the f2f briefly:

    But a face-to-face Morgan Poll conducted last weekend showed the ALP with a record lead of 24 point lead in the wake of federal Health Minister Tony Abbott’s derogatory comments about asbestos sufferer Bernie Banton.

    This is just a breaking news article, not an opinion piece – Spamaham is probably still looking for the silver lining. I eagerly await his effort on this one – unless he’s otherwise occupied in cleaning out his desk …

  13. jasmin, having a law back ground doesn’t make someone a better member of parliament. Howard has one. Intelligence, compassion, imagination just to name a few things are what’s needed. ‘learned friends’? get of your high horse.

  14. Ocean Colour Sean, clearly you haven’t been able to. That disappointment aside, I have not decided to accept or not Nicole on the basis of MSM soundbites or poor grades in policy recital.

  16. 315
    jasmine_Anadyr Says:
    November 9th, 2007 at 9:48 pm

    ” My position is quite simply this, that on all the evidence presented Ms Cornes is —
    So why is she constantly vilified, attacked and abused? I think you can guess my answer.?

    What is your answer Jasmine ? Please don’t say sexism or gender discrimination unless you have more than johnny-come-lately ‘third wave’ feminist slogans to rant. Substantive evidence or at least reasonable anecdotal observations would be appreciated.

    It is possible that Cornes is being attacked by people on other grounds other than her being female. Feminist hairy armpit freinds attending Flinders University and Adelaide and who live in “Boothby” anecdotally tell me she is unpopular with some over there because she is “a twit”, full stop. What say you ?

  17. [jasmin, having a law back ground doesn’t make someone a better member of parliament.]

    I agree, I think there are too many lawyers in parliament. Ministers have heaps of advisors to tell them the precise intent and operation of bills and acts. Having a law degree doesn’t make someone a genius in all areas of the law anyway.

    I’m not saying it would hurt, just that it isn’t a pre-requisite to being a good politician.

  18. I’m a bit sorry to have mentioned Cornes seeing the above. The reason we are disagreeing is really that when you are put forward as a “celebrity candidate”, you will get a lot more scrutiny. Live by the sword, die by the sword. I’m sure she is not unintelligent (have to retract tat brain-dead comment from last night) but it was naive of her to run hoping to wing it when she was under the spotlight. I hope she wins. (And I’ve known Andrew Southcott for thirty years! Actually, he’s a very pleasant, intelligent guy but not much of a politician)

  20. It is very bizzare that you are arguing a qualification in law, or indeed even studies in it, does not help someone making laws … that is what they do .. haven’t you noticed .. I’m not saying it is necessary, nor a guarantee of a good member, but you are suggesting it is irrelevant that is absurd and bizzare.

  22. ShowsOn, hate to say it but politics makes a lot of demands on people’s time. That’s why it tends to favor people like lawyers and discourages people like nurses.

  24. Ashley & Sean, whilst I agree that Nicole Cornes is not the most impressive candidate, & perhaps not even the best available for Boothby, I don’t think she deserves the criticism she gets.

    The general suggestion that she has no depth could easily be applied to a significant number of MPs.

    It may even be refreshing to have someone in parliament who doesn’t give the usual rehearsed responses to questions that we’re used to hearing.

  29. [It is very bizzare that you are arguing a qualification in law, or indeed even studies in it, does not help someone making laws ]

    Well, they don’t really write the legislation. The politician / government come up with a policy that they want parliament to pass, but the actual text of the legislation is performed by the highly trained lawyers in the attorney generals department.

    They specialise in that job, they know what wording to use based on precedent etc. If a politician is worried that the wording won’t do what the policy says it should do, they take advice from other lawyers in the attorney general department to make that judgment.

  31. Nicole Cornes looked horrible the other day the media savaged her really bad, said she had invented another take on the door stoop interview and it has a media scrum following Nicole Cornes who is trying to avoid answering question. I don’t think Boothby will be falling anytime soon, why would be want such a calamity to befall the most outstanding and consistent dorothy dixer performer on the Tory side of politics.

  32. LL only gave primaries in Wentworth 44/36 Turnbull/Newhouse, so that’s a 9-10% swing on primaries to the ALP. The Greens got 11% last time (King got 18%), so it’s very much in play.

  33. Been there @ 246:

    I have been trying, so far unsuccessfully, to compare the total levels of state government funding, from all sources, (as a percentage of GDP), in representative periods (say 1993-1995, under Keating and 2003-2005 under Howard/Costello). I think this might just show that State funding has significantly reduced, however try as I might I can’t seem to access the data.Can anyone help?
    If it doesn’t show this then maybe the States have been more inefficient in the Howard years, although I don’t think so.

    I work in a state Treasury, actually in a branch which deals with Commonwealth-State financial relations, so I know something of these issues. Unfortunately, I’ve never done an historical analysis of this kind.

    What you really should do is to get hold of Commonwealth Budget papers and look up the quantum of money transferred to the states in each year, and – yes – probably best to do this as a percentage of GDP. The numbers you are looking for will be “total Specific Purpose Payments”, “total General Purpose Payments/Financial Assistance Grants” (pre-1999), and total GST (post-1999). Unfortunately, whilst you will find a few budgets at http://www.budget.gov.au, it’ll only go back till around ’96 or ’97. Thus, to compare with Hawke/Keating, you’d need to go to your state library and look for the dead-tree versions.

    I can say off the top of my head that the states are *now* better off with the GST than before (they had to abolish a number of their own taxes to get it), but it must be remembered that the expenses of running government and delivering services has risen in the same time.

    It was in the media recently, but it has been shown demonstrably that the Commonwealth have been disinvesting in health, contributing less of the pie now than they used to. This is horribly irresponsible and cynical in an environment where health costs are skyrocketing and we have an ageing population that will, into the future, require more and better heath care.

    You are right in that the Commonwealth has used its funding contribution to bully the states into implementing Commonwealth policy – eg the flagpoles in schoolyards, the compulsory use of AWAs in some sectors (I think TAFE, iirc). This is done through the Specific Purpose Payment mechanism, which (unlike the GST revenue) is ‘tied funding’ – ie the state must match the SPP funding $ for $, and adhere to a raft of conditions relating to reporting, badging, outputs, policy. The states need this money, and so are forced to sign up to SPPs, despite the conditions and the lack of growth in funding in real terms coming from the Commonwealth.

    Whilst I am a Labor voter, I am under no illusion that this practice won’t continue under Rudd, in some form or another. The whole “buck stops with me” shtick has the subtext that he will continue to bully the states to achieve his own policy agenda through SPPs. The threat to take over hospitals demonstrates this.

    Not of direct help, but you may find this an interesting read: from the Tas Budget.

    Anyway, enough rambling from me – although feel free to ask further questions, I’ll help if I can.

  34. Thank you Showson. Thats why diversity in the house is highly desired. To ensure the content meets the needs of all Australians.

  35. Why i sthere the presumption that a politician must know law? Ministers don’t draft legislation personally. they have parliamentary draftsmen, departmental advisers and law reform commissions. Does the Education Minister have to be a teacher? Does the treasurer have to be an accountant?

    Politicians make policy – legislation should merely be a mechanical process to put policy into action.

  36. Lateline says Galaxy poll in Wentworth (for Sunday Tele) has Turnbull 44%, Newhouse 36% (from memory), with the rest to Greens and independents. They didn’t do a 2PP breakdown (presume that’s being held back for the Sunday Tele), but my quick calculations suggest Newhouse would need 70%+ to win. Given that most Greens preferences will favour him, but there are a lot of Liberal voters who’d lodge a pulp mill protest then preference to Turnbull anyway, I reckon it’s line ball. Gut feeling is to give it to Turnbull, but very close!

    Will be fun to watch Wentworth on election night.

  39. Is there a law during against media fabricating stories during an election period in order to support a political party?

    If so what is the punishment on the journalist and media outlet?

    If there is no law then a journalist can manufacture the most outrageous lie that they like, win one side the election and worry about facing the music later. AND if your side gets back in you can bet you won’t be chased too hard.

    If there is no law then it means there is absolutely no protection agains corrupt journalists, corrupt media outlets and corrupt actions by a political party.

    Was the Liberal party today acting in a corrupt way given that they were talking to a story they must have know was not true?

    It seems to me that it is a very simple matter indeed to corrupt our democracy in a world of concentrated media ownership.

    What is the chance then that a few days before the election a Howard friendly journalist will manufacture the most emotive outrageous lie that costs labor the election – but they get protection from government afterwards?

    ON the ABC if it can be proven that during an election period that they consistently and deliberately favoured one side of polics is that a crime? Can anyone be prosecuted?

  44. jasmine_Anadyr

    First up…Love your work!,

    **Hats off**

    GOD I love the way you “Lawyer talk”

    Honestly, you could turn a shit-storm into a sunbeam and I would still believe you 🙂

    Classic

  47. MarkTwain:
    LIE. Who’d a thunk.

    Ms Twain the acronym was not a random selection. Though often to your chagrin you will have noticed my obsession with berating the MSM for merely perpetuating the lies of those who aim to deceive. The right to know and obligations of a free press to ensure democracy and all that there stuff eh!

    However your repugnance of Shanahans shenanigans has nonetheless convinced me there are still journos that have standards.

    So cheers and may the truth be your sword Ms Twain.

  48. Still Jon the question remains what happened to the rest of King’s vote?

    18% with 7 and 3 to ALP and Lib that’s 8% still in play??

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 9 of 14
1 … 8 9 10 … 14