Morgan: 59-41

The latest Morgan face-to-face survey, combining polling conducted over the previous two weekends, shows Labor’s two-party lead down slightly to 59-41 from 61-39 in the previous survey. Their primary vote is down 3.5 per cent to 48.5 per cent, but the Coalition is up only 1 per cent to 35 per cent. The balance has gone to Family First and independent/others.

The Courier-Mail also reports on a Newspoll survey conducted for Griffith University’s Federalism Project showing “almost one in five” believe the states should be abolished, and “only one in three people in Queensland wants the status quo of federal, state and local government to remain”. More from Griffith University’s Socio-Legal Research Centre.

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.

285 comments on “Morgan: 59-41”

Comments Page 2 of 6
1 2 3 … 6

  1. Progressive Says:
    July 11th, 2008 at 4:50 pm

    anything is better than the current farce of the idiot from Bradfield being propped up by a bunch of right wing dingbats.

    It is getting tiresome; unfortunately the dingbats have control.

  2. Rudd should have a quiet word with Brumby…

    “The Victorian Government secured the rights for the extension of the Melbourne Grand Prix contract for a further 5 years — till 2015 — despite renewed opposition to the race and the cost to taxpayers”

    According to Gary Morgan this was a poll-effecting event during the fortnight!

    Such bad press for Rudd it’s no wonder Labor’s plumbing the depths at 59/41.

  6. The Pineapple Party saga continues on to the constitutional conventions on July 26 and 27.

    [Labor Premier Anna Bligh said she was taking little notice of the merger saga.

    “If I got distracted every time the Liberal and National parties had a squabble nothing would ever get done,” Ms Bligh told reporters in Brisbane today.

    “I make it my business to pay them as little attention as I can, because it seems that all they are going to do is continue to brawl, continue to fight, and talk about themselves to themselves.”

    She said the outcome would not change her election plans.

    “I have made a commitment to the people of Queensland that my government will be going its full term,” she said.]

    http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/brough-in-limbo-over-presidency-of-merged-parties/2008/07/11/1215658125026.html

  7. Having read the “Fuel for Thought” document (it is on the CSIRO website for anyone with time to read 44 pages of fairly light reading), it does not suggest that $8 litre petrol is likely as the media has reported (One TV station even suggested that was a minimum figure). It said if production was to fall greatly (at the top range of peak Oil pundits predictions), demand did not fall and there was no technology changes in relation to bio-fuels and car design $8 a litre might happen. Even then it was expected to fall after 2018.

    The most alarming part of the report was the $3 a litre in 2012 under most scenarios (peak oil, no peak oil, bio-fuels, no bio-fuels).

    The rest of it is a sign of hope as it suggest a host of alternatives that will be used and was advocating heavy investement in R&D which is the likely solution like it has been for every other humanitian problem in history.

  8. I dont know why everyone keeps looking at bio fuels. It might help with one problem but it just causes another (i.e. food shortages)

  10. [Dario @ 58 – Not necessarily. Bio fuels could be made in huge bioreactors using algae. Wikipedia have a good article on this.]

    Unfortunately it seems those sorts of biofuels are getting very little attention, while the ones made from food sources are. Should that change, it would be a positive thing, but I won’t be holding my breath.

  11. The report mentioned that that algaes are about 5 to 10 years away, and that other biofuels are currently being produce. Most of Australia’s biofuels are made from waste agriculture products (Sugar Cane stalks, wheat straw). You can eat it but you wouldn’t want to.

    The food problem is an issue in the USA where corn is being used and is driving up prices (which has sent a shockwave through the other grain markets). There is also an issue in Brazil where sugarcane is being grown where rainforests once stood.

    Some of the Algaes can use up to 10% of the sunlight, which is as good as solar cells. Biofuels should be look upon as portable solar energy.

  13. Jovial Monk @ 62 – The problem is they subsidise it for just about everything. It’s the reason I believe our government made a mistake in ending the ‘single desk’ arrangement for wheat.

    Apart from perhaps lower prices, it means we’ve given up about the only lever we had to encourage them (and the EU) to end farm subsidies. Not only do they encourage waste and environmental harm, they greatly impact returns Third World farmers can get for their produce.

  16. I guess I’m pretty pi$$ed of with the NSW Labor government, but I’m almost prompted to vote for them again when I read lead-ins like this one from today’s Telegraph.

    PREMIER Morris Iemma’s chances of holding on to power have suffered another blow with 84 per cent of The Daily Telegraph readers saying he should quit.

    I’m sure that 84% of Telegraph readers disapproving of him in an unscientific, on-line poll will cause him to put the noose around his neck and jump the plank.

    “Another blow”? A bunch of Murdoch-adicted crazies don’t approve of Iemma? Hit me with a limp lettuce leaf. This is the Tele getting a bit above itself, methinks. Bootstrapping gone silly.

  20. Yeah, all true, but it’s the way the Lib politicians have no shame in calling their opponents “pathetic” and “appalling” in public that irks me. This born-to-rule thing dies hard in them. If Labor politician got up at a party conference and used this kind of language they’d be called gangsters and ruffians, buffoons all. But the Lib pollies seem to think it’s their right to use whatever language they like.

    Turnbull is another example of this. The other night on Lateline, and a weeks or so before in his SMH vcolumn he was so rude and crude it made even me blush.

  21. “The charge was adjourned sine die and reissued in the name of her former husband Jason John Campbell.

    Police offered no evidence when the count came before the court in January, 2008 and the charge was dismissed.”

    I pointed this out to ABC online a few months ago – when they tried a hatchet job on Jodie Campbell – they issued a “clarification”.

    Brenda will not be leader of the fibs when parliament next sits. 😛

  22. “Ms Campbell had failed to say a word in Canberra in defence of funding cuts to an Australian Technical College (ATC) in the north-east electorate, Dr Nelson said. ”

    Brenda has not mentioned ATC’s in parliament either. In fact the only time they have been mentioned was here:

    http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/view_document.aspx?id=2837765&table=HANSARDR

    Jill Hall ALP.

    Although the Mad Monk did have something to say “Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Shortland is wasting our time raving on about people going surfing. If she has a question to ask the minister, she should ask it.”

  25. Oh Shock Horror, Kevin Rudd Swears in his office !!!

    [PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd has a foul mouth and a terrible temper and swears at staff when things go wrong, the author of an explosive new book reveals.

    Leading political analyst Peter van Onselen, who gained national attention for a candid book on John Howard last year, destroys the goody-two-shoes image of Mr Rudd by revealing he often uses the “F word” at work.

    Dr van Onselen said there was a lot more to Mr Rudd than the church-going politician who was elected as Prime Minister last year.

    He said that, in his office, Mr Rudd was as foul mouthed as any other politician he had studied.

    “The book reveals Mr Rudd to be somewhat of a potty mouth behind closed doors,” Dr van Onselen said.

    “During his Opposition leadership, our research reveals Kevin Rudd’s foul language and temper in his office and use of the F word.

    “There are two Kevin Rudds. There is the Kevin Rudd that his staff gets to see and there is the Kevin Rudd that the Australian public voted for — and they are very different.

    “He prefers not to swear in front of women, but does in front of men.

    “Some of his staff are angered by the hypocrisy of him criticising others who use foul language when he does so himself behind closed doors.

    “What’s interesting about this is that it was Mr Rudd who kicked people out of the Labor Party for use of foul language.

    “Union boss Dean Mighell was kicked out of Labor by Kevin Rudd because he used foul language.

    “Swearing certainly isn’t a hanging offence. But what interests me is the difference between what the public sees and how Mr Rudd conducts himself in his private office.

    “I noted during my research that Mr Howard rarely swore in public or private.” ]

    http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24009354-948,00.html

  28. [Union boss Dean Mighell was kicked out of Labor by Kevin Rudd because he used foul language]

    Wasnt he booted out because he was gloating about screwing employers over in a wage case? Olsen should wash his mouth (and memory) out.

  29. Some of my friends are world beaters at swearing but choose very carefully when and where to swear. I really don’t see the big deal. What’s this bloke want Rudd to do, swear at every interview or in parliament? Maybe cut out swearing altogether because …. um , er, well buggered if I know really.

  32. I think he is doing a good job personally. Of course I was expecting perfection unlike some and nor do I think Rome was built in a day. I’ll make my judgement at the end of the first term.

  34. OMG Kevin Rudd swears?
    That ought to bump the approval rating up a few more points!

    Any advance spoilers of Glenn Milne’s offering for tomorrow’s Sunday News Ltd papers?

  36. It means, Edward, I’m prepared to cut him slack if need be on policy implementation. Let me repeat, I think he is doing a good job. I certainly don’t believe swearing or not makes or breaks a PM. Hell, if that was the case we would have a lot of “broken” PM’s and the US would have a lot of “broken” presidents. LBJ was renowned for swearing. See if you can find an interview with him swearing profusely in it.

  39. No Gary B you no very well that my question had nothing to do with swearing. I am asking your personal opinion, is there anything you would be critical to date on the PM’s performance? I am taking your answers to mean your opinion is a no.

  42. Look, if you must know I think he wears awful styled suits. Oh, and his hair could be better combed and he could stop mispronouncing words. You know Edward, the real important stuff like that.

  44. This “news” that Rudd swears in his office is not news at all of course. I knew of this last year. This came out in the course of the LOOONG election campaign. It’s actually old news.

  47. No Gary B I dont believe asking a question is sniping. I always answer your questions.

    I am curious to see if you have any criticisms. One advantage conservative governments have is that expectations of what they will do are so much lower. The reflective views of partisans are often more perceptive when their is some honest assessment.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 6
1 2 3 … 6