Morgan: Rudd 55, Turnbull 30

Roy Morgan has released a mid-week phone survey of 574 respondents on attitudes to the party leaders, which has 55 per cent favouring Kevin Rudd against 30 per cent for Malcolm Turnbull. Kevin Rudd has a 55 per cent approval rating and 31 per cent disapproval; Malcolm Turnbull’s figures are 43 per cent and 24 per cent. The sample produced a two-party result of 57-43 in favour of Labor: no further detail on voting intention is provided.

UPDATE: Aristotle in comments points out that primary vote figures from the survey are available on Morgan’s poll trends page: Labor 46.5 per cent, Coalition 34.5 per cent, Greens 8 per cent, others 4.5 per cent.

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.

451 comments on “Morgan: Rudd 55, Turnbull 30”

Comments Page 2 of 10
1 2 3 … 10

  1. [Bill, I wasn’t talking to you. I was talking to Evan.]

    Well, maybe I felt guilty. It COULD have been me.

    No. 44:

    [So why do you give us these continued long-winded sermons about how terrible the Australian is, complete with full-length quotes?

    Sorry, BB, but can we just be clear that you your statement was full of crap.]

    Clearly I read the on-line edition. I just don’t buy or read the paper edition. I thought even you would have realised that, GP.

    And, as my mother would have said, “GP, there’s no need to swear”.

    Style note: “Crap” is not a becoming word to use at, or in regards to the posts of other bloggers. I’m surprised the New WB didn’t yellow-card you. I’d have sent you to the Naughty Corner, personally.

  2. This is what Bully proposed:

    [THE Opposition Leader, Malcolm Turnbull, yesterday called for the Federal Government to follow the Bush Administration by injecting taxpayer funds into Australian financial institutions, saying this would reduce interest rates for home buyers.

    Mr Turnbull floated the radical idea as a way the Government could protect Australians from the crisis gripping world financial markets over bad debt on the books of financial institutions.

    But he provided no details of his scheme, apart from comparing it to President George Bush’s $US700 billion bail-out ($844 billion) for US financial institutions – and saying it could be operated by Treasury’s Office of Financial Management.]

    http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2008/09/21/1221935450267.html

  3. … and the quotes are not full-length. They’re just the money quotes out of articles sometimes a couple of thousand words in length. Now please go away for a while, GP. I’m off to walk my dogs. I know you’re upset at the dreadful debut of Messiah #3, Turnbull, but there’s no need to take your frustrations out on us (or my dogs).

  4. The Australian is a privately owned newspaper. It can take whatever political line it likes, it can publish whatever commentators it likes, and it can spin the news any way it likes. It has no obligation, legal or ethical, to be objective, fair, balanced or anything else. Since it chooses to be a Liberal Party propaganda mouthpiece, it behoves all Labor supporters (a) not to buy it (b) not to read it, even online, and (c) not to go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about it all the goddam time.

    Buy for now.

  5. [It has no obligation, legal or ethical, to be objective, fair, balanced or anything else.]

    Yes it has, when the same journalists that are the worst offenders claim total objectivity, accusing others (e.g. bloggers) of being the biased ones.

    To not read it, and to not analyse and try to expose its foibles is ignoring the manouevres of the enemy.

  6. Why did the Govt. introduce and recently enact the Commonwealth Securities and Investment Legislation Amendment Act 2008 if it was all Talcum’s idea?

  7. After Talcum ascended to the throne the Libs were crowing about the money flowing in to the coffers from the big end of town.

    Then his first piece of public policy it effectively … “I know. Let’s take an unspecified amout of public money from ordinary taxpayers and give it to my mechant banker mates.”

    Surely it’s going to end in disaster!

  8. I think from past experience we should know that oppositions don’t get kudos from the public for “thinking of something first”. All they know is that the government is doing it. How do we know Turnbull wasn’t aware this was on the cards and came up with it? Swan would be harmstrung. He couldn’t release it until all was ready, unlike Turnbull.

  9. GB

    The Govt. enacted legislation two friggin months ago to allow them do exactly what they announced today. Yet somehow it is all Talcum’s idea – give me a break.

  10. [Clearly I read the on-line edition.]

    Which constitutes a “free copy” of the Newspaper; hence my assertion that your original statement was, indeed, crap.

    By the way, crap has long been apart of the Australian vernacular and I wouldn’t dare call it an expletive.

  11. No 55

    Dennis Shanahan would have a completely legitimate claim in criticising the innards of this blog being a bastion of left wing bias. Heck, aside from Glen, I and very few others, this is a Rudd lovers’ circle jerk. 🙂

  12. If someone is effing over my democracy through deliberate partisan disinformation then I reserver the right to complain about it rather than lay down and slovenly take it. Now it would not be a problem if there were a diversity of media ownership and thus a wide diversity of partisan views – but there are not and the rules were changed by our friend again recently just before the last election.

  15. To back you up RU 59 –
    “Mr Swan said the Council of Financial Regulators had last Friday agreed on taking this action, which would be temporary.”

  16. No 62

    That is not an argument. No-one is screwing over “your” democracy. Indeed, Mr Shanahan is exercising his democratic rights by offering his own political opinion. The media ownership laws change nothing – Murdoch owned News Limited before the change and he still owns them now.

    All the confected outrage is just a facade to disguise your true desire of having a media that solely sings the praises of left-leaning ideals and politicians.

  19. No 67

    My point is that you don’t win arguments by going to extremes, and to me that weakens the cause of AGW evangelists when they start proclaiming utter tripe like “Greenland will be the only inhabitable place on earth” if we don’t act now. It’s not constructive, it’s hysterical.

  20. No 68

    Reba was the de facto member for Coogee, so in effect Cabramatta had no sitting ALP member :). The Libs have a good chance of winning if they run a good campaign. The fact that the candidate is also Vietnamese will also count.

  21. [why are ABC saying Labor will struggle to retain Cabramatta in the bye election when last election result was
    ALP 79 Lib 21]

    Maybe Shanners is acting as a ghost writer?

  22. GP

    Nobody wins an arguement – unless they are part of a debating team. Arguments are a futile exercise, discussion of opinions, on the other hand, can result in a win for all.

    A lesson you may learn, when you eventually reach the age where wisdom is more important than scoring points. 😉

  23. I find that The Australian is the highest quality and most informative media publication in the country. I enjoy reading it.

    For those of you that don’t, stop whining, read The Age and watch ABC/SBS. It’s that simple.

  24. No 72

    ruawake, discursive discourse necessarily involves expounding alternative arguments which may more may not persuade either proponent. If Mr Flannery’s idea of persuasion is to use hysteria, then he will not succeed.

  25. [I find that The Australian is the highest quality and most informative media publication in the country. I enjoy reading it.]

    Hear, hear (with the exception of Philip Adams). 🙂

  26. I like Bill Leak and there are some other good bits of comedy in The Australian. I don’t think it has ever made a profit in fact it has lost squillions. If Rupert did not want a national newspaper it would cease to exist.

    I have worked for Murdoch in the past, he is a great manager. But Kerry used to give better Chrissy Hampers. 🙂

  28. GP

    The discursive turn in philosophy and the human sciences rests on the notion that the investigation of meaning is best pursued through a focus on language, since language can be taken as the model of meaningful activity in general. This metaphorical status of language requires that language is not understood merely in the sense of speaking activity but rather that such speaking activity, insofar as it forms and conveys meaning, be taken as exemplary for all social action. 🙂

  29. No 77

    The Finnigans, Mr Turnbull was simply arguing that the legislative capacity for the government to inject funds into the market had existed for some months but the government had not acted. Indeed, it criticised Turnbull for even suggesting it on the grounds that our Banks were well-regulated.

    Mr Swan has nowhere to run and his sudden change of opinion makes him look like an idiot.

  32. [A lesson you may learn, when you eventually reach the age where wisdom is more important than scoring points.]

    Not that GP scores any points. He’s too predictable.

    I guess not too many bloggers here claim to be unbiased. Yet that rag, The Australian, continually publishes pontificating op-eds by it’s Liberal urgers to that exact effect, saying how “fact-based” they are, and how much “research” they do, compared to blog posters who are, supposedly, parasites who bloodsuck off their good work etc. etc. Bloodsuckers or not, in a free society we have a right to analyse and criticise the writings of the likes of Shanahan. They publish it. We knock it down every time. It’s like a turkey shoot, actually. They are so obviously bigoted.

  34. No 82

    [I guess not too many bloggers here claim to be unbiased. Yet that rag, The Australian, continually publishes pontificating op-eds by it’s Liberal urgers]

    BB, do you not read what you say? By your own admission you can’t admit to being unbiased, yet you unashamedly pontificate on the alleged bias of The Australian?

    You are a walking double standard! 😀

  39. [Mr Turnbull was simply arguing that the legislative capacity for the government to inject funds into the market had existed for some months but the government had not acted.]
    Yes, but when did Turnbull say this. I would argue not months ago, unless you have proof of this of course.

  40. Ru
    pick me pick me

    Actually I think talcums ppm number is still got a way to go yet

    The actual final figure will be a guide as to how competitive the fibs will be come 2010

  41. That’s only a preference GP, not a complaint of bias and no wonder. That’s like saying you prefer Turnbull to Nelson, both are Libs.

  43. When the leader of a political party cannot get a PPM figure close to his parties primary vote he is in trouble. He only managed 30 because Brenda and Hammock are no longer in the game (temporarily).

    I’m guessing he will be down to 20 in 3 months.

  44. [What’s your point GB? I’m sure you enjoy your select choice of Chardonnay socialists in the Age and SMH.]
    I think you have just confirmed BB’s point that the OO is biased toward the Libs with this statement.

  45. Hey listen GP, I don’t mind you pontificating about the genius of whoever it is you’ve got a crush on at the moment, but I do mind being quoted out of contest.

    You quote me as saying this:

    [I guess not too many bloggers here claim to be unbiased. Yet that rag, The Australian, continually publishes pontificating op-eds by it’s Liberal urgers]

    suggesting I was saying it’s OK for me to be biased but not the Australian. The full quote was a follows (emphasis added):

    [I guess not too many bloggers here claim to be unbiased. Yet that rag, The Australian, continually publishes pontificating op-eds by it’s Liberal urgers TO THAT EXACT EFFECT]

    What I was saying was that at least I admit to being biased. The Australian claims not to be, yet clearly is.

    It is most ill-becoming, and outright dishonest of even a twerp like you to go around selectively quoting out of context..

    I don’t mind argument, but I do mind dishonesty.

  46. No 94

    Certain opinion writers may be conservatively inclined, but to characterise the entire paper as biased is ridiculous.

    At the end of the day, you lefties only support free speech as long as it’s left wing speech.

  47. [At the end of the day, you lefties only support free speech as long as it’s left wing speech.]
    Not at all GP. I want fairness for both sides from all of our news outlets, nothing more and nothing less.

  48. Free Speech is an American concept Generic – we do not have free speech in our constitution – in fact we have Laws that would be unconstitutional in the USA.

    If you want free speech, support a bill of rights. Otherwise forget the concept.

  49. [Certain opinion writers may be conservatively inclined, but to characterise the entire paper as biased is ridiculous.]

    Oh puhlease GP, don’t make such absurd statements. Is a paper unbiased because it includes a minor amount of material supporting one political side whilst the vast majority of its published material supports another political side?

  50. The High Court found in the Theophanous case that the Constitution contains an “implied right” of political free speech, because it establishes a parliamentary democracy and a parliamentary democracy cannot functionm without freedom of political speech.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 10
1 2 3 … 10