The Fairfax broadsheets today bring the latest ACNielsen poll of federal voting intention, showing Labor’s lead up to 55-45 compared with 54-46 last month. Labor’s primary vote is steady on 43 per cent with the Coalition down one point to 39 per cent. The poll also finds Peter Costello to be favoured as Liberal leader by 56 per cent of the 1400 respondents compared with 27 per cent for Malcolm Turnbull and 17 per cent for Brendan Nelson. In head-to-head terms, Costello leads Turnbull 49-35 and Turnbull leads Nelson 47-31. Worst of all for Nelson, his approval rating is down from 36 per cent to 31 per cent and his disapproval is up from 46 per cent to 53 per cent. Hat tip to poll watcher extraordinaire James J.
UPDATE: The latest weekly Essential Research survey shows Labor maintaining its lead of 58-42. Also featured are questions on pensions, industrial relations and Australia’s performance at the Olympics.
I wonder if the WA Libs will still invite Brendon to campaign here in light of this poll, or will they invite Costello ? Nelson is to the WA Libs this election, what Latham was to the WA ALP in the 2005 State Election – poison 🙂
I’ll be more imppressed with a poll that pits Cossie up against Rudd. This 15% of Labor voters are more inclined or less inclined stuff really tells us nothing. Show us how Cossie would affect the voting intentions.
agree
Interesting despite costello’s high plus figures vs Turnbull overall , buried in Poll is amongst Labor suporters (55%) Costello vs Turnbull is line ball 42% to 41% , suggesting a change of Leadership either way may not improve Liberal’s poll standings , OR if so it will be by same rate
I wonder if Nielsen have changed anything since the election when they appeared to be a little higher than the rest.
Hmmm…
Where have all the ‘one term’ stories gone?
Peter J Nicol… they’ll be back. It’s just that the media much prefer leadership stories over any other story when it comes to politics. The uglier the fight the better. This is certainly doing Mr Costello’s book sale prospects no harm.
On the Insider show yesterday Barry Cassidy said that if Costello was leader that he would be able to take it up to Rudd policy wise at least, unlike Nelson.
Where do the these commentators get these weird ideas from?
Bushfire Bill @ 7 –
Who’d buy it? the juicy bits will be summarised in the Fairfax papers anyway.
I predict in the bin, out the front with the Da Vinci Code guff and Dog Whisperer paraphenalia within three weeks.
Agreed. I’ve heard the first print run is 50,000. Don’t know how many trees that is, but I fear a lot of them will have died for nothing.
As for the “juicy bits,” my betting is that he’ll chicken out on most of the really damning stuff. Seems to me that he’d come out of it as dirty as Howard, given that for 12 years he did whatever Rodent wanted even when, supposedly, he was against it. Flushing the huge surpluses down the Treasury toilet, for example, with bugger all to show for it.
Still, they could always sell it as a cure for insomnia!
Muskiemp at #8 wrote:
Cassidy would say that (he’s got a grudge against Rudd, doesn’t he?), but others would differ …
The only “policies” I have heard come from Slack Pete involve a Third World IR agenda: Pay cuts for workers, slave wages for apprentices, abolishing of protection from Unfair Dismissal for every employee.
Meanwhile, Mr SmirkChoices himself appears not to be the hardest worker around; in fact is deplored by colleagues for laziness …
Hahaha so the Libs are feeling renewed because a poll puts Cossie above Nelson for the opp leader’s job??? My aunt’s right elbow would be more popular than Mr 12%! Desperate times, despereate measures I guess.
At the last election the Australian people had the opportunity to embrace Costello as Prime Minister because Howard had implicitly agreed in principle to hand over if the Coalition were victorious. They chose not to accept the invitation.
I cannot see anything that has happened in the last 10 months that has changed peoples minds to a great degree. The polls are saying that the present time the intention of the electorate is to maintain the status quo.
This is not to say that people agree with everything being done by PM Rudd and his government, but they are not seen as incompetent.
Wow there’s a lot violent agreement this morning isnt there? Where’s Gary Bruce for a different perspective?
That’s a bit strong.
Things have definitely changed for the worse economically. I’m not blaming the Rudd government for that, quite the contrary, but things have changed.
If you read the chicken entrails and pay attention to the economic news I suppose it could be said that the evidence was there for a downturn, coincidentally in the post-election period. But not many do that, or if they do, can understand it. In my experience, people woudl rather believe things will tootle along as they were forever. It’s a human trait.
I think a big thng in the voters’ minds helping Rudd’s election was that the economy would sail along as it had before, but that a few loose ends would be tied up in the moral government stakes by a more compassionate Labor.
The Libs were deathly afraid of this thought process, hence Costello’s attempt at trying to talk up the sub-prime crisis (in the process trying not to talk down the economy), all tied up with his “Ferrari mechanic” fable. But when sub-prime seemed to fizzle out a bit (before it really hit in the second round) the electorate wrote off Cozzie’s talk as scare-mongering. I wouldn’t be surprised if they actually marked him down for it.
It didn’t help that negativity on the economy just before an election would be looked upon as a political mistake. Howard probably told Cozzie to stop the “black cloud” talk and get on the up-beat again. Neither party really got into disaster scenarios, or if they did, they only dipped their toes in the water rather than take the full baptism.
I think Howard was delaying and delaying the election hoping for bad economic news. when it didn’t quite come in time, the game was up and he had to go. This was a lucky break for Rudd, in no uncertain terms. If the election had ben scheduled for just a few months later, I’m not so sure Rudd would have won, what with banks imploding and interest rates rising. Even so the interest rates and inflation would have been Howard’s fault, the public would have remembered how we dodged a bullet during Asian Meltdown and, on balance, returned the Libs, in my opinion.
Now that Labor are in government, I think people will stick with Labor for at least a couple of elections, simply because Labor have done a good job of cutting off the Libs at the ankles. They saw off Howard and many of the old hands, and I don’t think Cozzie will hang around… too much like hard work. I think Cozzie would have known back in September that if sub-prime hit hard there was nothing he could do about it either.
Now that the decision has been made it’ll stick. I’d bet Costello knows there’s nothing he can do and that the people wouldn’t put up with him – a “Treasurer” totally out of power – for very long, without serious rumblings. I think the voters realise there are no quick fixes for the economic troubles we’re in. Although they’re not disastrous, they’re serious enough and will have to be rectified by the slow-and-steady method rather than cheap shots like petrol excise cuts.
At the moment Labor are the only ones doing policy development (as opposed to stupid sniping and sloganeering, hankering for the good old days) and the public will remember that come next election.
The other point is that a downturn in the first year of a term coudl be well and truly forgotten by year 3… and it’s year three that the next elelction happens!
ESJ
I’m going to disagree. If the Libs can manage 55-45 with a hopelessly unpopular leader, moving to another leader can only improove their situation. Neither Cossie nor Turnbull rate anywhere as badly. I know lots of Lib-leaning swinging voters who won’t vote for the Libs under Nelson coz they reckon he is a joke. They might vote for Cossie and they would really give Turnbull a good look at.
I think the Libs would still lose under Smirk 53-47 or something like that. If Turnbull could get the Libs to support him with a bit of discipline with no divisions (unlikely) it could be even closer.
Bushfire Bill @ 14 :
See what you mean.
Perhaps we could unify our theories by proposing that things have changed for the worse, but the change came too late to save the Liberal Party’s arse?
Am I the only person who thinks this is in bad taste? How can you name a swim centre after someone who drowned?
Stephanie Rice recently visited the Harold Holt Swim Centre.
The sting in the Nielsen poll is in voter intentions. Cossie is popular with the Lib voters who are just desperate for some good news but he is a turn off for the non coalition voters who parked their vote with Ruddy last year. No sign of them moving it out of the garage if the Cossie gets the nod. I just can’t see Cossie reinventing himself as a firm tough leader. The baggage is too much . He’s a political gunner. He was gunner do lots of things if only he had had the ticker to chuck Howard out. He’s a dilettante with no passion for the job.
hHe doesn’ deserve it and we don’t deserve him.
And Diogenes, I think I spotted Harold Holt at the opening of the Beijing Olympics in the official party. So I don’t think Steph was doing anything in bad taste.
13 Edward – You have an opportunity to state your own views and all you want is my view. Says it all really. Aren’t you late for school?
Oh, by the way Edward I put my view earlier (see #2).
Alan
Judging by the way they swam, I think that our men’s swim team might have spend a bit too much time at the Harold Holt Swim Centre.
Peter Hartcher has an interesting view on this poll.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/peter-hartcher/2008/08/17/1218911460359.html
Nelson’s ratings are in free fall because he is being undermined, not because his performance is any worse. I expect most of the change in his ‘support’ are Liberals who just want him gone, rather than Labor or swinging voters who want a ‘contest’. These figures therefore reveal nothing and people can hypothesise about Costello for however long he keeps playing this silly silent game.
I think the Harold Holt swim centre is a great example of the wry Australian sense of humour 🙂
[If the Libs can manage 55-45 with a hopelessly unpopular leader, moving to another leader can only improove their situation.]
That’s highly debatable, on several fronts
Dario
Apart from the double O in improove, how do you disagree with the Libs getting a “bounce” by chucking Brenda?
28 Diogenes – If I may step in here, just read the Harcher article (link above at 24). Stirton expresses this doubt.
GB
That article says that the Libs would improve under Tip but not by enough to win, which is basically what I said.
[Apart from the double O in improove, how do you disagree with the Libs getting a “bounce” by chucking Brenda?]
Yes, as GB & Diogenes said, from the article:
“But even so, the poll does not suggest that a Costello leadership would be enough to put the Coalition ahead. ‘Superficially it looks good for Peter Costello,’ Stirton observes, ‘but when you look at where his support comes from, it’s mainly Liberal voters.’
But to win an election, the Coalition needs to win over people currently supporting Labor. Asked whether a Costello leadership would make them more or less likely to vote for the Coalition, 15 per cent said more likely but 24 per cent said less. ‘Costello is a net negative among Labor voters,’ Stirton points out.”
The other large problem with Costello is that he has a hell of a lot of baggage, i.e. WC. While the Libs might be dumb enough to believe that the voters have forgotten the last election already, you can bet the voters haven’t. Nelson & Turnbull don’t have that burden around their necks (although they have others), and you can bet Labor will remind everyone come election time about the policy formerly known as WorkChoices. It will be an equivalent to Labor’s ‘economy & interest rates’ burden that took them 12 years to get over.
Diogenes
#30
“GB
That article says that the Libs would improve under Tip but not by enough to win, which is basically what I said.”
No it doesn’t Actualy Poll says alot of conflictimg things but not that
1/ It puts Costello MINUS 9% (15% more and 24% less likely) thats not imptovement , 2/ then it gives Mr Smirka big surplus over Nelson/Turnbull amongst Liberal supporters (well thats useless trying to win over some of 55%) , and 3/ then it rates Mr Smirk & Turnful equal amongst labor suporters (which means they will equaly bring Liberal vote down or up)
All up , alot of timber mixed with fluff saying little , except for one thing Sir Kevin has a great 10% lead tgats been consisitent all year
30 Diogenes – to me Stirton actually questions whether the Libs would gain by Costello’s leadership.
“But to win an election, the Coalition needs to win over people currently supporting Labor. Asked whether a Costello leadership would make them more or less likely to vote for the Coalition, 15 per cent said more likely but 24 per cent said less. ‘Costello is a net negative among Labor voters,’ Stirton points out.”
How do you have a net loss from those voters you need to pick up, ie those who say they would vote Labor, and gain? You’ve already got those saying they will vote Liberal.
It all depends on who those Labor voters who had strong feelings about Cossie were. If the 24% who were less likely to vote Lib with Cossie were never going to vote Lib anyway, they are pretty irrelevant (I would be one of those). If the 15% who were more likely to vote for Lib under Cossie are the genuine “swinging voters”, the Libs would get a net win under Tip.
We really need a direct Rudd v Tip poll.
If I’m correct, it boils down to this …
The Coalition lost votes to Labor, and the Coalition needs them back.
Assuming thy lost the votes because of WorkChoices (biggest vote-changer), I doubt Costello can entice them back, given he is even more radical on IR than Howard was prepared to go.
Especially, as Dario said (#31), if Labor runs a Costello-IR scare campaign, I see Costello as a net vote-loser for the Coalition.
The fact that he (now) seems preferred by Coalition voters as leader is neither here nor there really. The rusted-ons are always going to vote Liberal, no matter who the leader.
Sorry this is off topic folks, but I thought you might be amused. Last night I was watching the Olympic boxing on SBS. Before an ad break the anchorman, Les Murray, mentioned that Australia’s last Olympic boxing medalist was Grahame Cheney (who won silver as a light welterweight in Seoul, 1988). By way of explaining that Grahame was not related to Dick Cheney, he mentioned that our medal-winning champ was “not as punch drunk as Dick.”
(I didn’t know punch drunkness was genetic, but that’s probably just a reflection of my pugilistic ignorance.)
34 Diogenes – “We really need a direct Rudd v Tip poll.”
Agree entirely. We could debate this poll all day and get nowhere. Too many factors missing. As I said back at #2 a comaparison with Rudd and Labor is needed. I suspect this won’t happen unless Cossie commits to the cause.
Maybe they named the swim centre after the guy who was kidnapped by the Russians?
That’s not in bad tase. The guy’s a hero. Being interrogated and tortured all these years…
😛
Our friends at the Facebook site “I support Drafting Peter Costello” are pretty excited by the Nielsen poll.
I don’t even think it was one of the bludgers (whose comments on that site seem to have been expunged). 😉
Diogenes @ 19
I think naming anything after Harold Holt was in bad taste.
On reflection, I may have been a bit harsh on Bush and Condi about Georgia.
1. I will stick to the view that they didn’t control their client properly.
2. The US capacity to act was fatally weakened once they over-reached militarily in Iraq and Afghanistan. This was made plain when the US military went public against a strike on Iran.
3. The NATO allies have cold feet. They are mostly Elois. Having suffered more than their share of the bulk of the 20thC casualties, and in some cases being more or less completely reliant on Russian energy, they have no stomach for bear baiting. The German economy would be trashed within days.
Bottom line, short of going straight to the NUKE option, Bush and Condi do not have the conventional chips on the table to deal.
I wonder what Costello would have named after him. The top of an iceberg maybe?
I don’t know what all the chatter in the media is all about. Costello was and intuitively was always going to be the preferred leader. Even Howard handing him the broken chalice was recognition that the job was his and that he would be the most acceptable alternative.
The Howard government really consisted of the two names, Howard and Costello, both incessantly iconised by the media. Costello’s profile would have given him some ready made authority and acceptability with the electorate. There would be no question on if he could run the country – he was already part of that for a decade.
So the media making games with the idea Costello is more popular than someone else is not news. The real news considering the advantage Costello has had is that Turnbull is not that far away.
But in any case this is all about who would be the most popular person to run the Titanic as it lay at the bottom of the ocean.
Gary Bruce Says:
August 18th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I wonder what Costello would have named after him. The top of an iceberg maybe?
Or a hammock
If anyone wants to know the abilities of Costello I can only refer them to his debate with Swan in the run up to the election. This was meant to be the event that showed up Swan and revealed the smart, glossy talented Costello in full flow.
Given that Costello had been Treasurer for a decade, had the benefit of Treasury advices and coaching you would think he would have made easy work of the nervous Mr Swan. But Costello was mundane, uninspiring, dull and did no better than Swan – the debate being pretty much a draw though the worm I believe gave it to Swan.
[I wonder what Costello would have named after him. The top of an iceberg maybe?
Or a hammock]
Or a hammock on top of an iceberg!
OK, here’s a trick question: What is the difference between Putin and Costello?
Offtopic message:
Gary Bruce:
Can you please see post 213 on the WA thread ?
William,
Can it be possible to configure wordpress to send people private messages so we don’t clog up the threads with offtopic stuff ?
William,
Latest ERMS Survey now out in Tasmania.
{PUBLIC support for Premier David Bartlett has fallen from 46 per cent to 40 per cent in the wake of the latest twin crises to beset the Tasmanian Government.
The latest EMRS political survey of 1000 Tasmanian voters taken last week had support for the Labor government and the Liberal Opposition tied at 30 per cent of the vote each.
But more Tasmanians still want Mr Bartlett as their Premier than Liberal Opposition leader Will Hodgman, who was preferred by one-third (33%) of voters.}
http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,24199130-3462,00.html
Is it possible that with Costello at the opposition helm, opposition tension between Costello and Turbull will continue to destabilise the Libs?