Galaxy: Rudd 58, Turnbull 28

Findings of a Galaxy poll published in today’s News Limited papers from a small sample of 400 (nothing on voting intention):

• Kevin Rudd leads Malcolm Turnbull as preferred leader 58 to 28 per cent. The last federal Galaxy poll in March had Rudd leading Brendan Nelson 69 per cent to 15 per cent.
• Twenty-three per cent of respondents said they would be more likely to vote Liberal with Turnbull as leader than they would have been with Nelson, against 11 per cent less likely.
• Fifty-three per cent believe Turnbull would give the Liberals a better chance at the next election against 35 per cent for Peter Costello.
• Forty-eight per cent of respondents considered Turnbull “arrogant” against 23 per cent for Rudd.
• Fifty-one per cent considered Rudd a “strong leader” against 30 per cent for Turnbull, and 49 per cent thought Rudd “decisive” (surely much the same thing) against 30 per cent for Turnbull.
• Fifty-six per cent of respondents believed Rudd had a “a vision of the future” and 52 per cent thought him “in touch with voters”.

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.

304 comments on “Galaxy: Rudd 58, Turnbull 28”

Comments Page 3 of 7
1 2 3 4 7
  1. It would be interesting to see the number of days Menzies spent overseas in his first term as PM. I recall that one trip to London went for about six weeks!
    The number of days spent overseas is immaterial, it is the worth of the time that is the real question. It seems to me that this trip of Rudds is valuable. So were most of Howards although like much of his administration he became more selfindulgent in the latter stages of his reign, at about the time journalists and others were proclaiming him invulnerable.

  2. No 92

    Dario, such insolence is intolerable. During Howard’s reign I travelled to the US, throughout Europe, Asia and the south pacific and not once was I confronted with a negative opinion of Australia.

    The left’s constant assertion that our international image has suffered under Howard is an undeniable nonsense; a figment of their collectivist imaginations.

  3. [Dudd only seems to be good at attending gab-fests Adam. When is he going to do something?]

    He’s been doing lots of things GP. Just because you don’t agree with them doesn’t make them not exist.

  4. [Dario, such insolence is intolerable. During Howard’s reign I travelled to the US, throughout Europe, Asia and the south pacific and not once was I confronted with a negative opinion of Australia.]

    I have travelled to Europe, the US & Canada and Asia before, during and after Howard. While most people overseas don’t pay that much attention to Australia’s role internationally, there was definitely a change with those that did.

  5. Gary, hardly how many people are going to notice we have a new PM after 12 years of the same bloke, anyway what Howard did over 12 years helped us on the international world stage Rudd has been in for what almost a year so i hardly think 1 year of a new government would make any difference to already formed views.

  6. No 105

    Rubbish Dario. The reality is that nobody cares what Australia does on climate change given that we contribute a fraction of the world’s total emissions. Rudd’s globe-trotting might be giving him, and his worshippers, an over-heightened sense of self-importance.

  7. No 109

    I’m not running Australia down at all. I’m simply looking at reality, a state of mind from which many here seem quite distant.

  8. It’s no use GP most bloggers think Rudd is the best thing since sliced bread.

    The thing is if Howard had done such a bad job and made us look so terrible in the views of people around the world i hardly think changing leaders would automatically stop this and thus since I encountered no anamosity i think i can say Howie did a bang up job 😉

    This week is going to be interesting a new Liberal leader and Labor Rudderless and as usual i suspect termoil and mayhem on the ALP side.

  9. [hardly how many people are going to notice we have a new PM after 12 years of the same bloke]

    Apologising to the Aboriginies actually was quite a big deal overseas. I had Canadian business colleagues bringing it up.

  10. Pies is out to do his bit for the Turnbull cause. A new “Messiah” has arrived.

    [FEDERAL Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull’s selection of shadow cabinet members will reveal how he intends to meet the challenges of his new leadership.

    He has been elected to take charge of the Liberal Party and Coalition at a time not of his choosing but by happenstance, at a time when the convulsions of the global economy play to his experience in the world of investment banking.

    He understands what is taking place on Wall Street and has an understanding of the knock-on effects for the Australian economy. It is apparent from the convolutions of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and his economic ministers that they do not.]

    A quick glance at the comments was good for a laugh. I hope these delusional people stay there. I couldn’t stand reading their twisted logic too often. Check these two.

    [The best bit of mongrel-dog that Malcolm Turnbull could show is a resolute determination to lance the Heiner affair boil which not only infects Queensland’s public administration but the Office of the Prime Minister and the Office of the Govenor-General.]

    [Thankyou for your excellent columns and accurate observations on all things political, Piers. It is always a pleasure to read such intelligent and well-written prose… with the touch of humour to spice it up. You are always fair and balanced in your comments,and I delight to admit I am always in full agreement with your position on all political topics.]

    Please don’t go there if you are easily offended or don’t have a good sense of humour.

    http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/piersakerman/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/turnbull_needs_some_mongrel/

  11. Glen #107:

    [i hardly think 1 year of a new government would make any difference to already formed views.]

    Even if that is true, let’s not even begin the process of changing the perception others have of us, eh?

    What an ignorant argument that is. Nothing at all would be achieved in any area of human endavour if instant results were required.

    No roads built, no new aircraft designed, no computer software written, no scientific breakthroughs, not even the first tortured beginnings on the road to redepmtion for the Liberal Party… nothing, if instant sucess was the criterion.

  12. Speaking of mayhem and turmoil, has Turnbull rounded up enough laggards to form a Shadow Cabinet yet? Barnaby doesn’t seem convinced about the new ship.

  13. [Yeah, and 6 months later, the plight of Aborigines has not changed]

    After nothing constructive being done for 30 years you think it can be fixed in 10 months? Puhleese. Private industry getting ivolved in providing jobs for Aborigines is a pretty good start. Let’s see how it’s going in a few years shall we?

  14. Perhaps Adam, but at least Malcolm has the balls to face the music, unlike Kevin Rudd who as Opposition Leader only ever faced the Government benches when he had to ask a question. Malcolm looks em all right in the face, he’s got more guts than Rudd that’s for starters.

  15. Glen, in my many trips overseas a lot of people have commented on a dislike for John Howard and have stated joy at ‘that horrible man’ being kicked out. Of course, it could all have been a coincidence…

    Of course, it’s a bit rich criticising Rudd for spending time overseas on business 1 week after Mr Turnbull ‘jetsetted’ back from Italy where he was reportedly lounging on beaches.

    I’ve said before that Turnbull is a dud… will be interesting to see if he turns out to be one over the coming years.

  16. 117 “Yeah, and 6 months later, the plight of Aborigines has not changed. The challenges remain of the same magnitude.”

    People skills Abbott spent three months recently at a remote aboriginal community in Far North Queensland and comes back screaming that he doesn’t want the Communities Shadow portfolio because it is too far from the action,GP. So what is your point?

  17. Itep its not surprising the people you hang around are left wing, but that’s not the majority of opinions just a select few.

    Bah, he didnt turn his back for half of question time like Rudd, he was doing it to organise questions.

    Even Rudd doesnt face the Opposition in QT!

  18. Three points to make about Rudd’s overseas travel:

    1. Does it ever occur to the media and other detractors that there are bound to be some years when more overseas travel is necessary than others? There is a lot going on in the world at the moment.

    2. Rudd is clearly a leader who likes to gather all the facts first and then make his decisions – a very sensible approach IMHO. Hence his need to visit various parts of the globe in his first year to gather knowledge first hand. It’s not popular with the mischief makers who don’t want to know about all the hard preparatory work going on behind the scenes and just want everything fixed NOW, but in the overall scheme of things their opinions count for very little.

    3.. Judging by the current polls, the electorate is not the least bit concerned over this bogus issue. it is only people with ulterior motives and nothing more constructive to say who are pursuing it.

    (GB Liked your point about “who the hell made John Howard’s overseas travel the yardstick”. Who indeed)?

  19. [102 Generic Person Dudd only seems to be good at attending gab-fests Adam. When is he going to do something?]
    Ah, back to your old name calling best GP. That’s when I know you’re on the ropes.

  20. Adam:

    Thanks for the Sculin info

    As for Stanley Bruce, i was highly amused to see that the defence of him published in the Australian just before the 2007 election deliberately didn’t mention his racism and support of White Australia or his anti-semitism

  21. [(GB Liked your point about “who the hell made John Howard’s overseas travel the yardstick”. Who indeed)?]

    And a selective yardstick at that. Howard spent 64 days overseas in 2002, 60 days in 2003, and 65 days in 2005.

  22. Goodness me Glen is pyschic! He knows what is in Turnbull’s mind when he turns his back in QT! “Turning one’s back” is a standard QT tactic, Glen, everyone does it – Howard, Nelson, Beazley, Rudd. I wouldn’t hang my hat on this one if I were you.

  23. In Curtin’s famous speech in 1942 when he pledged to defend the Australian continent etc etc, he actually said “defend it for the white race,” but that bit always gets edited out. There is now a bipartisan agreement to pretend that White Australia never happened.

  24. Surely I can’t be the only one who doesn’t understand what’s so great about Andrew Robb… yet he’s a candidate for Shadow Treasurer and was Foreign Affairs? Is it just party politics?

  25. This Howard “yardstick” concept is a hangover from the days when Howard was king. They just can’t get used to the idea that comparing Rudd “unfavourably with Howard is likely to garner Rudd MORE kudos than not.

    Over at Pies’ redoubt at the Sunday Telegraph:

    [With the real possibility that the Rudd government may be a one-term wonder, the choice of shadow cabinet members is critical to the Opposition’s potential success.]

    Such molehills of denialism in the face of mountain ranges of evidence to the contrary is truly gob-smacking. One thing you have to grant the Coalition acolytes: they don’t give up.

    This is Turnbull’s greatest mistake, in my opinion. He keeps on about the “next election” like a flattened prizefighter demanding a rematch. The public has little or no interest in the next election. Only the Libs share that with a few deluded die-hards in tow. Elections solve very little inand of themselves. It’s policy, soundly based, calmly implemented, not shot from the hips of the latest focus group, that counts.

  26. I wasn’t trying to score points – i was just struck as you are by how White Australia is edited out a lot – and not just by Anglos – various minority groups want to pretend things like Charlie Chan and the various wartime cartoons (eg “Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips”) never happened by suppressing them

  27. Despite what I said above, I will defend Calwell on the “two Wongs” line.
    From the Wikipedia Calwell article (which I wrote):

    Calwell’s remark in Parliament in 1947 that “Two Wongs don’t make a White” is widely quoted. The remark was intended as a joke, being a reference to a Chinese resident called Wong who was wrongly threatened with deportation, and a Liberal MP, Sir Thomas White. Today the remark is seen as evidence that Calwell was a racist.

    Calwell later wrote: “It is important to me, at least, to set about the facts about [this] remark, which have been misrepresented so often it has become tiresome… I said, among other things, that an error may have been made in the case of two men named Wong. I then said, and I quote from Hansard, ‘There are many Wongs in the Chinese community, but I have to say – and I am sure that the Honourable Member for Balaclava [Thomas White] will not mind me doing so – that “two Wongs do not make a White”.’ It was a jocose remark, made partly at the expense of the member for Balaclava… Hon T.W. White. I expected that I would have been correctly reported, as I was in Hansard, and that the initial letter ‘W’ on both the names ‘Wong’ and ‘White’ would have been written in capitals. But [later] the name of White was deliberately altered into a definition of colour, so as to read ‘two Wongs don’t make a white.’ … There was never any intention in my mind to raise any question of colour.”[2]

    In his 1978 biography of Calwell, Colm Kiernan wrote: “Was Calwell a racist? All Australians who upheld the White Australia policy were racist in the sense that they upheld a policy which discriminated against coloured migrants… Calwell never denied the discriminatory reality of the laws: ‘It is true that a measure of discrimination on racial grounds is exercised in the administration of our immigration policy.’ But he did not consider himself to be superior to any Asian.”[3] Calwell also said in Parliament: “I have no racial animosity.”[4]. Kiernan further says: “Calwell had many friends among the Chinese community in Melbourne. This would have been impossible if he had been prejudiced against them. Anthony Wang, the first Chinese councillor of the City of Melbourne, has acknowledged Calwell’s support and friendship. He liked the Chinese people so much that he learnt Mandarin in which language he could converse.”[5]

    Kiernan is correct to observe that until the 1950s virtually all Australians supported the White Australian policy, that Calwell’s views were entirely within the political mainstream at that time, and Calwell believed himself to be free of personal prejudice against people of other races. But these observations must be set against Calwell’s comments in his 1972 memoirs, Be Just and Fear Not, in which he made it clear that he maintained his view that non-European people should not be allowed to settle in Australia. He wrote: “I am proud of my white skin, just as a Chinese is proud of his yellow skin, a Japanese of his brown skin, and the Indians of their various hues from black to coffee-coloured. Anybody who is not proud of his race is not a man at all. And any man who tries to stigmatize the Australian community as racist because they want to preserve this country for the white race is doing our nation great harm… I reject, in conscience, the idea that Australia should or ever can become a multi-racial society and survive.”[6]

  28. [128 Glen – Even Rudd doesnt face the Opposition in QT!]
    I’ve got news for you Glen. Rudd didn’t face the government in QT when in opposition and look where that got him.

  29. Glen

    When MPs of either side use QT to beat the opposition around the ears with irrelevancies, instead of answering the question, I think turning one’s back is a very reasonable response to it. As much as some would like to see it, the rules of etiquette simply don’t apply in the bear pit of parliament. Mooning would probably be considered a bit over the top though – as entertaining as it might be for the TV audience and the public gallery.

  30. One thing in particular I have noticed whenever Journalists report on issues such as Rudd’s OS travel, is that they usually give it a slightly negative slant, rarely provide any positive benefits from it and “always” provide a comment from a Coalition Member who is most likely to be decisively negative. A classic example is this piece by Phillip Coorey where his LNP spokesperson of choice is Barnaby Joyce.

    [The Coalition says Mr Rudd is more concerned with lofty foreign matters that those concerning people at home.

    It will attack Mr Rudd heavily next week for what it believes is an unnecessary trip when he should be home dealing with ways to help pensioners.

    “This guy is getting completely disconnected from what’s going on and sooner or later he’s going to realise the main game is actually in this nation, not some other nation,” said Senator Barnaby Joyce, of the Nationals.]

    Notice that the whole article, headline included, is written from a Coalition perspective and this has become so common now that it has pretty well become the norm.

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/no-place-like-home-libs-tell-rudd/2008/09/19/1221331206999.html

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 3 of 7
1 2 3 4 7