Morgan: 59-41

Morgan has simultaneously released results of face-to-face polling conducted over the previous two weekends, and a phone poll conducted on Wednesday and Thursday. The former has Labor leading 49 per cent to 36 per cent on the primary vote and 59-41 on two-party preferred, compared with 61.5-38.5 at the previous such poll a fortnight earlier; the latter has Labor’s leads at 50 per cent to 34.5 per cent and 60-40, compared with 63-37 last week. In other news, political parties’ financial disclosure returns for 2006/07 have been published by the Australian Electoral Commission: Steven Mayne sifts through the evidence at Crikey (subscriber only).

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.

302 comments on “Morgan: 59-41”

Comments Page 1 of 7
1 2 … 7

  2. While Rudd’s honeymoon persists and the Libs fall on each other over Sorry, who would like to tip the TPP highwater mark that will be achieved by the ALP in a Morgan poll this year ?

    I almost wish Steven Kaye was still around. I’d love to hear his rationale as to why 80-20 is just where Brendan wants to be to swoop back in 2010.

  3. To save Glen and others the bother, this poll is rigged, it is pro-Labor, it underestimates the National vote, it overestimates the Greens. Have I left out anything??

    As for the numbers, I want to see a new record!! Is the current record 62/38 or has it been higher??

  4. How many times during the honeymoon?

    It’s is impossible to take these poll results seriously. Gary Morgan should really wait until the “first 100 days” out of respect for our overworked powers of analysis. Nor do we need to know how many people don’t want to say “sorry”. We had the election.

    The figures on who pays the piper are more interesting. Sad to see that One Nation only received small change.

  6. br

    for old time sake

    ‘3 April 2007 at 5:59 pm

    And Newspoll underestimates the National Party vote by 2% as they had them on on 4% when they generally get 6% once you add that on and it trims the ALPs lead by even more…how will the scumbags of the Labor Party stop the rot that will more than likely set in from now on…budget here we come!”

  7. #6. Gus, that was just like old times. But may be you need to get out more often ? 🙂

    #4. Kevin, who said anything about taking the polls seriously ? That might spoil our fun !

    I’ve been a bit quiet but can I say regarding our local result with St Maxine …..

    Told you !!!!

  8. Clearly, there are withdrawals going on here – so I searched my vault and
    found these two gems.

    Steven Kaye Says:
    June 18th, 2007 at 2:38 am

    The Nielsen is a rogue poll, but the Newspoll is about right (with a slight underestimation of the Nationals primary vote). Correcting for that, we find both parties are at either extreme of the 6 point band I mentioned in an earlier thread, a band they’ll occupy until the end of July. Then a further narrowing will occur.

    Nostradamus Says:
    June 18th, 2007 at 7:04 am

    The polls will stay in this kind of range with a slight trend towards narrowing until the election is called, after which they will change dramatically to 50-50 or with the Government in front. The Coalition will be then nicely placed for a fifth election win.

  10. I think Nostradamus may have been real. There is detail and a seriousness there that would be out of place in a pure wind-up.

  11. wind-up or not, would be good to see a bit of contrition from some bloggers here. What was always missing was the question of HOW the polls would change.

  13. br
    Actually im between gigs at the moment so searching me archives is as simple as a few keystrokes (im that twisted ive got bushfires “glen and his scraps of paper” post on my screensaver -makes me chuckle every time)

    andrew
    as regards the neocon cheer squad only glen and esj remain to take up the fight
    and i think they havent figured what went wrong
    yet 🙂

  16. Everyone so far is in furious agreement yet Poster 13 has stumbled on another point worthy of the host’s attention: ‘taking up the fight’ needs a wider range of views ALLOWED on the threads, if only to permit feel good mocking by the decent and compassionate of any ‘neocon’ perspectives and/or other opinions at odds with a prevailing group think.

  17. DC, I didn’t ban Steven Kaye for being a neocon. He can neocon it up all the way to Teheran for all I care. I banned him for being an obnoxious jerk (with an added penchant for misogynistic abuse thrown in for good measure). I’m actually more reluctant to ban jerks of the right than of the left (K Jin, for instance), because I very keenly feel the imbalance around here.

  18. This is more or less an anti-Brendan Nelson thing than anything else. Malcolm Turnbull is infinitely more likeable, and I look forward to him taking out Nelson within the year.

  19. WB #17,

    Hear, hear! May you always strive for balance.

    DC #18,

    If Turnbull knows what he’s doing, he’ll wait until after the next election. At the rate Rudd’s going about ingratiating himself with the people (mostly by either fulfilling election promises or explaining why he isn’t), he’ll be a shoo-in in 2010.

  20. Whoops, sorry Michael. I can get a little distracted sometimes – especially by good music, which I’m listening to right now.

  21. To be fair to the Liberal supporters who were commenting on here during the campaign, there was some pretty wild speculation on the other side as well.

    The truth as always sat somewhere in the middle. The Liberal base is still as secure as it was before the election.

  22. Why would anyone consider remotely credible such a poll given how long last year Labor invariably polled high percentages on 2PP, only to see how “soft”, to employ a Morganism”, those Labor numbers really became as the election loomed at the start of Spring?

    Didn’t matter a jot how out of touch the Howard government had become nor how incompetent the Coalition’s election campaign turned out (except for all the bribes for Howard’s solidly loyal base such as the private schools), Labor still couldn’t even crack 53%. Golly, Labor might have a fair shot at 54% if gormless Brendan Nelson is still the Opposition’s Leader next election, but I’m not falling for any more inflated Labor figures from any pollster, most particularly from Morgan.

  26. The truth as always sat somewhere in the middle. The Liberal base is still as secure as it was before the election.

    I’m not sure about this. Given the poll results for most of 2007, it’s amazing the Libs didn’t lose a few more seats. There were serious community concerns regarding a number of issues over the years, and the Coalition were not seen to be addressing these.

    I think ALP supporters were well-acquainted to seeing their team snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and, as if by contagion, some of the Stephen Kaye and Nostradamus types picked up on this, and used it to construct ever more-elaborate comeback fantasies.

    Still, I actually think there’s more room to analyse both this poll and the 2007 election from both sides of the political fence. This poll, for instance, has come amidst prophecies of international economic doom and gloom, yet there’s no evidence the masses are suddenly taken with penitence for voting ALP.

  28. As much as figures like these please me, I have to say it is totally unlikely that they can occur in an election. The best ever results in elections is only going to get to 44-56 at the best. This is because about 40% of the population never votes labor and another 40% never vote Liberal (and not many vote Nationals no matter what).

    It is amazing that Liberals can’t see the trees for the forest in the “sorry” debate. The moderates in the party are fuming at the lost chance to give an appearence of progressiveness. I wonder if this will this sink Nelson quicker than anyone else had predicted? End of March is my tip now.

  32. 29
    John of Melbourne Says:
    February 1st, 2008 at 6:19 pm
    What goes up eventually must come down

    your ego, your predictions?

    or are you hoping for a reversal of your predictive powers starting…..NOW…

    no wait….NOW…no wait…

  36. WB (17) A feisty response to my earlier joust but fair enough (sorry about that but I couldn’t let the opportunity pass). I respect your patience in monitoring threads populated by so much self indulgent and repetitive group think and you are quite correct ‘to keenly feel the imbalance around here’.

  37. You guys DO realise that the polls DID narrow massively in the last month before the election, don’t you? Just like so many people said they would (whom were subsequently mocked)?

    Final 2PP was 52.7-43.3, were any of the polls even near that during the year? I don’t think one predicted a result below 53. Most polls a month before that were in the 58 range.

    Don’t worry, I don’t plan to argue the point, it is a waste of time. But I just thought I would point that out. Such is the privilege of the winners, they can overlook such annoying nuances, and history will be none the wiser.

  38. Max,

    I agree the polls did narrow a lot in the last few days, the Libs were successful in pulling back some of their soft vote, most of this in the final week of the campaign. But I’d say the mean poll figure for pre-election was 55-6% (a movement of five/six points), 58,59 were statistical outliers that were probably the result of the randomness of sampling.

  39. Max, youre right, only the very last polls were 52/48. I wonder what caused the narrowing from 56/44 before the campaign?? Especially given how bad the coalitions campaign was

  40. Stephen,

    I suppose it depends on where you start ‘the narrowing.’ A few months before the polls were consistently around the 57-58 range – I’d have to look at Bryan’s graphs to figure out where that started to shift. I vaguely recall a newspoll in the first week of the campaign which was at 58-42, but agree that would have been an outlier. I do agree that that the polls consistently predicted that the result would tighten.

    (my only point was to correct these boring chants of ‘the narrowing is a myth’ when it turned out to be correct, neither of which the two posters above me are guilty of.)

    As to why the numbers hardened, I really have no idea, the campaign (bar the first few days which were brilliant) was completely hopeless. Having said that… it seemed to do the job.

  41. The uncomfortable truth for many contributors on this website is that that there was a narrowing during the course of the campaign yet no one sensibly contends that the Coalition ‘won’ the campaign. There was an inevitability about victory for the Australian Labor Party from at least August 2007 (some might say earlier). For reasons not connected with decency, social justice and/or compassion, about 600,000 voters switched camps because they thought JWH had enjoyed a good go as prime minister and the other guy was a safe pair of hands. Queensland pride and a perception that workplace relations legislation was (unfairly) skewed in the employer’s favour, also played its part.

  43. Gusface,

    (im that twisted ive got bushfires “glen and his scraps of paper” post on my screensaver -makes me chuckle every time)

    I take that as a compliment. I can remember writing it, but can’t find it. Any clues?

  44. BB
    here in all its glory.

    “Glen’s been in his room all day, moving little squares of paper he cut out of his Spiderman colouring-in book around on his desk.

    They have names on them: “KRudd”, “Howard” “Costello”, “Newspoll”, “Swan”, “Burke”, “Campbell”, “Prosser” and many more.

    Round and round they go. He tries butting them together in every possible combination, corner to corner, side to side top to bottom.

    Doesn’t eat. Doesn’t sleep. Must work this out. Every now and again he thinks he’s onto something.

    See, if KRudd talked to Burke BOURKE and Costello sacked Campbell… no that wouldn’t work. What about if Howard sacked Campbell and BOurke walked into room with Prosser… no… So there’s these three politicians… nope… [NT/Slf: this no joke… mst CONCENTRATE].

    OK, he’s got it!

    Costello wedge KRudd/ends up getting Howard to sack Campbell/Swan comes along/ruins all by being caught with Burke in bed with altar boy. But altar boy Anglican sooooo…. KRudd MUST have something going there too. Maybe likes legless altar boys??? [N.T.Slf… “legless a.boys? POSSIBLE?”]?

    Meanwhile Nwspol 57/43: Labor ahead/landslide/000’s letter writers/bloggers say either don’t care abt. Burke or so angry/changing vote.

    Ah ha! It’s all a leftist plot!

    Cdnal Pell… [Pell —> Catholic —> McKewSOW —> KRudd??? XXX lk. into this…XXX… where does a.boy fit in???”] Pell chimes in with brill. abortion wdge. Abbott talks up Devil [Dvl wrshp??? Mst chk w. Op.Dei.].

    At last! All the pieces fit together.

    Writes post at Oz Politics. Gets told he’s crazy by leftie throng. Bk to drwing board.

    [lefties laughing —>>> desperate conceal truth? N.T.Slf: buy nw. pr. scissors… Is Peruginas XXX CHINESE XXX restr.?]

  46. Yes, the much-mocked narrowing did happen. However, it happened very, very slowly (perhaps one point per 6 weeks?) and didn’t really kick in hard until the very end of the campaign, by which time it was nullified by Jackie Kelly and other follies.
    Then again, I don’t think anybody truly expected a 59-41 finish, despite all the polling.
    I think we were all expecting a better Coalition campaign. We has listened so long to the standard narratives coming from the MSM that we really thought the Coalition would throw everything at that election, and that the ‘everything’ would be impressive. It wasn’t. Tax cuts, and a dog-whistle here and there. As far as Howard is concerned, it was hardly the campaign of a ‘master tactician’…

  48. I believe there was a “narrowing” during the election campaign as a couple of percent of voters who had been constantly telling pollsters that they would change their vote decided that they just couldnt bring themselves to do it. The question that should be analysed between now and the next election is what share of that percentage is wedded to the idea of supporting the status quo (and could probably be expected to now change their vote to the ALP), and what percentage is tied to the coalition by a rubber band that can be stretched but apparently cannot be broken.

    I have a friend who has been a long term supporter of the Libs, but he had been disgusted by the politics of Howard and said all last year that he would not vote for the coalition. In the end he did vote for them, consoling himself that Howard would be gone anyway, and most of the more objectionable members would then leave rather than stay on in opposition. He now regrets his weakness for not making a stand against Howard, but acknowledges that he is a rusted on conservative.

    How many of the late changers fall into each category, that is the question and the answer will determine the extent of the victory margin for the ALP at the next election.

  50. If we believe the polls then there was as dramatic swing back to the Coalition in the last 3-4 weeks. The result on the night, and perhaps the popular perception, was misguided by the better performance of the ALP at the booths relative to the postal etc votes. In the end it was not an overwhelming result. Perhaps this indicates the basically conservative nature of the electorate. Thus a barrage of what appeared to be hopelessly bad scare ads actually worked quite well.

    From my view I saw an early effort to take on the Libs with the response Ads featuring Rudd. These seemed very effective and addressed the failure to counter Lib scare themes at previous elections, But that was it as far as the ALP was concerned. The union ads on he other hand seemed well targeted and assertive.

    If we then look at the booth results there were many swings of 15-20% in workers areas in the suburbs and in industrial rural towns, but in the middle/upper class booths there was 0-5%. Indded in the classic doctors wives booth of Hunters Hill there was a small swing to the Libs.

    The figures tell me that that the union campaign was very effective in returning the Howard battlers to the ALP. The Libs campaign was very effective at scaring back the shopkeepers and the ALP campaign sucked yet again.

    The comfort factor for the ALP is that a Rudd government is unlikely to scare the horses so the conservative factor will favour the ALP the next time around.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 1 of 7
1 2 … 7