ACNielsen and Galaxy: 55-45

The latest federal ACNielsen poll, published in today’s Fairfax broadsheets, has Labor’s two-party lead down to 55-45 from 56-44 last month. Malcolm Turnbull’s approval rating is down four points to 51 per cent and his disapproval is up five to 35 per cent, while Kevin Rudd is more or less steady on 70 per cent and 22 per cent. Also included are questions on the government’s economic management (positive) and expectations about the economy (surprisingly optimistic).

UPDATE: Galaxy has also produced a poll showing Labor leading 55-45. The poll has Labor on 43 per cent of the primary vote, the Coalition on 40 per cent and the Greens on 11 per cent. No mention of a sample size that I can see, but in Galaxy’s case it’s usually about 800 (UPDATE: It’s 1004 for Galaxy, 1400 for ACNielsen).

UPDATE 2: A surprise from Essential Research: they too have Labor’s lead at 55-45 in their weekly survey. This is down from 59-41 last week, and as far as I’m aware is the closest result they have thus far produced. Also featured are questions on which party is deemed best to handle various issues (huge leads to Labor on climate change, environment and industrial relations, narrow ones to Liberal on inflation, national security and economic management) and the car manufacturing industry assistance package (47 per cent approve, 35 per cent disapprove).

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.

1,045 comments on “ACNielsen and Galaxy: 55-45”

Comments Page 2 of 21
1 2 3 21
  1. Socrates @ 50,

    Thanks for reminding me 😉 …. courtesy of our 2 kids we’ve got 2 grand coming our way. I expect it will be deposited with the first regular payment after December 1st.

    Cheers 🙂 🙂

  2. You’re welcome Juliem. That is why I think the criticism of Rudd and Swan on this is going to bite the critics. We haven’t even seen the ebenficial effects of the actions they have already decided yet. If the bonuses succeed in us having a relatively normal christmas retail period, they could well get a bounce towards Labor in December polls.

  3. Itep:

    […but I thought all the Labor cheerleaders here thought the article was a complete fabrication.]

    Not so. Overuse of the words “complete fabrication”. It wasn’t so much the article (which contained one contentious issues of fact),but the hullaballoo that followed it that concerned “Labor cheerleaders”, and yourself too, if you remember.

  4. Well I was concerned about issues before and after the publication of the article. Having said that, again, I don’t think there’s a real need to trawl through the whole debate again. Everyone will already have made their minds up about the whole issue, with most people having made up their mind that they don’t care about it at all.

  5. I like the boy cries wolf aspect. Rather than wait for Labor to make eventually inevitable economic policy stuffups, the conservative media went for the throat right from day one of the economic crisis. This means nobody will listen to them when the wolf does show itself, and everyone will think ‘just another day’.

  6. Looking at the break-up of the retail trade figures, there is a government that clearly deserves criticism, but it is not Rudds. It is of course, NSW Labor. The NSW economy has shown nine consecutive months of negative growth, with a full year result of -1.5% in gross spending. Take them out of the equation and the national figures are OK – yearly growth of better than 3%. But NSW (25% of the national economy) so weighs the figures down that the result looks flat. See
    http://www.abs.gov.au/AusStats/ABS@.nsf/MF/8501.0

    You can easily find the NSW data – just go to the State by State spreadsheet, and scroll across to the right till you hit the large negative numbers…

    At the moment I think Sussex Street is doing Rudd more damage than Turnbull.

  7. 7 . Janette Howard: the interview the ABC rejected

    This is an edited extract of Janette Howard’s interview with the ABC for The Howard Years. The program’s producers were unable to include any of this material:

    The biggest problem with our Government was the amazing numbers of ****wits, dipsticks and ****tards in it. I said to John even before we were elected, I said to him “John,” I said, “there’s not a single ****ing brain cell between the ****ing lot of them, I’ve never seen such a pack of ***eclowns.” And he agreed.

    At the first Cabinet meeting — I had to run most of them in the first few years because bloody John didn’t have a ****ing clue, he said “well Malcolm used to do it this way” and I said “I don’t give a **** how Fraser did it, what the **** did he know?” — I looked at the whole ****ing lot of them and I said “what a ****ing crew. To think you *****s are running the ****ing country. We’re going to have to do all ****ing work our ****ing selves.”

    Anyway we got rid of a few of them in the first years with all those ****ing travel rorts and eventually I called a halt and said “John,” I said, “if we keep this up there’ll be no ****ing bastard left. You’ll have to promote Petro ****ing Georgiou and Wilson ****ey and I’m not having that.”

    There was one person I couldn’t abide. Not Costello. I mean we hated him, smirking little ****, but I tell you the one person I could never stomach was that bloody John Fahey. I told him time after time not to ****ing smoke in Kirribilli but I’d come home and there he’d be, his feet up on the pouffe like Lord Muck watching the football, smoking like a chimney. ‘The puffer on the pouffe’ I called him. And he’d cough something terrible. Like a ****ing steam train going up a ****ing mountain. I always said one day he’d cough up a ****ing lung and eventually that’s what he did. I called him “One Lung John” after that. Silly ****wit.

    By about 2001 John had started to get the hang of chairing Cabinet. The poor little dear can be a bit slow on the uptake. Sometimes he just let Tim Fischer start rambling on about some ****ing walk he’d taken somewhere in the mountains and I’d have to say “Tim, love, no one gives a flying **** about your hike or your trains or what the **** ever so just sit there quietly will you dear?” I always had to sit on the same side as Richard Alston because I couldn’t handle that man’s eyes. God. He’s like some ****ing psycho staring at you. He unnerved me, he really did, when he left Cabinet I told John that he had to be sent out of the country, I didn’t want to run the ****ing risk of ever running into him. Ugh. Creepy.

    I tell you who I didn’t mind was that Kim Beazley. Kim knew his place, which was on the other side of the chamber. I said to Kim once at some do, “Kim, you’re a lovely man and I hope you lead the Labor Party forever.” He started on some ****ing anecdote about Chester A. Arthur or Ulysses S. Grant or Ward Pally Austin or some ***** and I said “enough GBH of the eardrums, Kim, it’s bad enough having to listen to that little toady Downer all day.”

    Downer was forever getting in the way trying to be ob-****ing-sequious to John, I don’t know how a man that tall could get underfoot so much I really don’t. But they put in that Simon Crean and then that Mark Latham character. Don’t get me started on that ****ing Latham ****. That ****ing **** ****ing **** a ****ing ****wit **** in the *****ing ****, and I ****ing said to John ****ing ****ball ****tard should ****ing **** **** ****ward **** for the rest of the ****ing decade.” I didn’t like him.

    Now I know you want to ask me about this so I’ll ****ing get right to the point. John had this absolute ****ing BRAIN SNAP in 2007 and decided he was going to quit. I’d been busting a ****ing gut on APEC all year. I was the ****ing one who did all the ****ing work for that ****ing thing, planning the ****ing security, the ****menus, the ****ing clothes, the ****ing meetings. I got no help from anyone except that nice Mr Watkins from NSW who was a pleasure to work with and handsome in a proper sort of way, I quite liked him.

    Anyway, I’d worked my ****ing arse off all year and John starts whingeing “I think I should quit, they don’t want me to stay, they think they’ll lose with me.” And I hit the ****ing roof and told him he either stayed in the job or he could start looking for a couch to sleep on. And he says in this pathetic little voice “but Janette, what about the party?” And I said to him “John Winston Howard the only party you need to worry about is the one where I ****ing caught you looking at that ****ing Condoleezza Rice woman.” And he gives me these big cow eyes god bless him. Back in 1967 about he made this so-called “joke” about how “once you’ve had black you never go back.” I never forgot that. And I caught him looking at that Rice woman when we went to America one time and he was in the doghouse for a few months.

    So we went to the ****ing reception and there was no more talk of resignations. And that ****ing Rice woman stayed right away from my husband. Sow.

    The thing I remember most about the Howard years is work. Hard ****ing work. I couldn’t rely on the Cabinet, and most of the time I couldn’t even rely on John. I just had to bloody do it myself. In the end it was almost a relief that we lost, I was getting bone tired day after day doing it all. Politics is a really tough job.

    The Howard Years (sans Janette) screens tonight on ABC1.

    HAHAHA!

  8. LTEP
    If they expected more contradictions of everything they have said in the past year of opposition and previous terms in government – they shouldn’t worry there is plenty more in the text of the G20 summary agreement. That thing will be a gold mine for Swan and Tanner in coming days. It makes their whole scare campaign, and suggestions to have budget surpluses at all times, look quite silly. The G20 statement also highlights systemic reasons why it was easy to balance budgets AROUND THE WORLD while the Libs were in office. That will make Costello choke.

  9. Machu Picchu is one of those places where you must visit before you die. Even my skeptical missus had to admit it was sensational. It is a journey back in time, politically, culturally, socially, historically and religiously of their glories, cruelties and inhumanities.

    Yet, It is a triumph of human spirit and ingenuity. You ask yourself, how could any human beings built such beauty and in harmony with the location where the condors dare and God lives. I will go back there one day to watch the sun rises over Machu Picchu.

    And Diog, you were wrong.

    http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=MG1TvZgf3hI

  10. Socrates

    The reason labor were re-elected in nsw at the last two election is that the punters
    considered the alternative to be even worse.

    In no way am i defending nsw labor but if the voters think they are going to be “saved” by fatty o’barrell and co they are in for a big shock.

    The nsw fibs have a real talent in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and thats even before the right wing religious nutters start to act up.

    And i have little doubt that most voters can tell the difference between state and federal issues. Some don’t of course and the likes of limited news and fib-tv will do their best to connect state and national issues.

  11. Dave

    Fair comments. I agree most voters can tell the difference between State and Federal politics. At least the non rusted-on ones can. Queensland under Beatty was a case in point. State Libs were a joke, and barely got enough seats to be called a party, while Federally I think Labor were down to 6 seats (?) out of 26 after 2004.

    I suppose my post should highlight that both sides in politics need to put the broom through NSW branches. There is no rational reason why our richest, most populous and best educated State should be an economic basket case.

  12. If voters had not been able to seperate federal & state politics then how did we end up with so many state Labor governments and a federal Liberal government for so long? It’s just silly.

  13. In nsw the carr years particularly the 5 years or so were an example of seeking office purely for the sake of power. Not all that dissimilar from rodent clinging to power in his later years. The big difference was the money available to rodent from the mineral boom.

    Again i am not defending nsw labor BUT those three magic words – vertical fiscal imbalance where the federal government has the lions share of income around 80% from memory – around that magnitude anyway and “responsibility for about 59% of total spending outlays.

    The states and territories – all of them get the short end of the stick and no way was rodent ever going to make life easier for them. States rely on property stamp duty, payroll taxes and property taxes. The GST income is netted off from what the states would have previously received from the feds via so called special purposes grants etc. On top of that rodent decreased spending on hospitals from the agreed 50% down to 40%.

    IF rodent had got back in last year I doubt if any state labor would have retained power

    Carr needed to sell the electricity assets – the generators plus the retail. He knew it would kill him politically so he rolled over.

    I wait with batted breath to see what o’barrel actually achieves if he lasts that long.

  14. [ If voters had not been able to seperate federal & state politics then how did we end up with so many state Labor governments and a federal Liberal government for so long? It’s just silly. ]

    Thats just the electorate having two bob each way isn’t it ?

    Same as they do with the house of reps and the senate.

  15. Dario @ 61 says: “Quite frankly, who cares what the Libs say”.

    Now that is a fair point, Dario, and it is supported by current opinion polling information. Yet it makes me wonder why so much bandwidth capacity is expended on PB threads by posters who want to talk (often in disparaging terms) about ‘what the Libs say’.

  16. [ Libs ‘expected more’ from G20 summit ]

    They should be asked to explain this.

    Robb and hockey were saying rudd should go there and just listen. They can’t have it both ways ? Their back to believing in the magic pudding.

  17. David, it’s called gloating, I think, and is not an activity entirely restricted to Labor supporters, although admittedly, supporters of other parties have had limited opportunities to do so of late.

  18. [So they would be a niche opportunity for Liberal supporters to vent on PB without much fear of contradiction?]

    They try sometimes but they can’t seem to explain why anyone should actually vote for Lib’s other than that they aren’t Labor. It might be an interested and lively debate if someone could explain the Liberal Party’s ideas and policies to put NSW back on track.

  19. [Only NSW Labor is incompetent. The rest of them are reasonable, and certainly better than the alternative.]

    You forgot WA, we’re now in the grips of an ego driven “alliance” of Libs and Nats led by a Premier so Vain he is insisting, according to Peter Kennedy, that they’d be referred to as “The Government”, rather than the “Barnett Government”

  20. “They try sometimes but they can’t seem to explain why anyone should actually vote for Lib’s other than that they aren’t Labor.”

    Sounds like you just described the entire Liberal Party!

    Silly Libs and their ideologically-driven historical anti-socialism… when nothing could be further from the truth…

  21. Fulvio @ 73 I agree that gloating is not limited to Labor supporters and also that the opportunities for non-Labor supporters to gloat are sparse at the moment. I thought another reason might be that barrackers for one or other of the major parties know (explicitly or implicitly) that the longevity in government of the party they support depends in part on a perception of irrelevance and/or disarray among those who sit opposite to a government. Chatter on political blogs about the hopelessness of what oppositions say and do, is one way of nourishing that perception.

  22. If being a rabble of an opposition kept an incompetent government in power, there wouldn’t have been a change in WA government.

  23. WA Labor showed just the way to lose an election really. I don’t think anyone would really argue the Liberals did anything amazing to win it.

  24. 80 David Charles – I think you are probably right David. I also think it’s a bit of “get back” for the time a supporters party is in opposition.

  25. A surprise from Essential Research: they too have Labor’s lead at 55-45 in their weekly survey. This is down from 59-41 last week, and as far as I’m aware is the closest result they have thus far produced. Also featured are questions on which party is deemed best to handle various issues (huge leads to Labor on climate change, environment and industrial relations, narrow ones to Liberal on inflation, national security and economic management) and the car manufacturing industry assistance package (47 per cent approve, 35 per cent disapprove).

  26. [A surprise from Essential Research: they too have Labor’s lead at 55-45 in their weekly survey. This is down from 59-41 last week, and as far as I’m aware is the closest result they have thus far produced.]

    It’s Teh NARROWING !!!!!!! 🙂

  27. I think these polls show that support is remains pretty solid for the Labor government, as they have since the beginning of 2007, and nothing that’s happening at the moment seems likely to change that. So I suppose we shouldn’t be entirely surprised when the media try to talk up the contest, even if they are missing the actual big story, which is of landslide polling so consistent for so long, that I’m pretty certain it’s unprecedented (anyone care to think of anything that comes close?).

    Rudd & co are showing themselves to be a prudent and cautiously reforming government, and most importantly, giving the impression of being “in charge”, while the Libs are simply opposing for the sake of it, with no positive agenda being put forward. Quite simply they are not giving anyone a reason to even consider shifting their votes to them. Could be that they are looking at the same polling that we are and simply trying to keep the base fired up in tough times.

    And at any rate, we shouldn’t be surprised that the Libs seem to be bereft of ideas. The mainstream Right-wing party in Australia has always been defined in opposition to Labor, since the original Fusion in 1909 of the Free Trade and Protectionist wings of the Right, uniting to feeeze out a growing Labor. The Right in Australia has always been a bit light on for policy, and their various longish periods in government have been mostly held toether by strong leadership (Bruce, Menzies 2, Faser, Howard) and/or a weak ALP (Lyons plus above). Until the next strong man comes along (and I don’t see Truffles as that man), they will continue to flounder.

  28. Socrates,

    [
    Socrates
    Posted Monday, November 17, 2008 at 12:41 pm | Permalink
    You’re welcome Juliem. That is why I think the criticism of Rudd and Swan on this is going to bite the critics. We haven’t even seen the ebenficial effects of the actions they have already decided yet. If the bonuses succeed in us having a relatively normal christmas retail period, they could well get a bounce towards Labor in December polls.
    ]

    We are going to be using part of our money to replace our laptop computer. It died on us the weekend before the US election. Mum, Dad and two kids have had to adjust to sharing one computer ;-). If not for this money upcoming, we wouldn’t have been able to replace it at this point in time. Given your comments above and my familys example, I think that this will be a pretty much normal Christmas period and the polls should continue their upward trends 🙂

  29. Hugo, very correct.

    “So I suppose we shouldn’t be entirely surprised when the media try to talk up the contest, even if they are missing the actual big story, which is of landslide polling so consistent for so long, that I’m pretty certain it’s unprecedented (anyone care to think of anything that comes close?).”

    Correct. See http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/the-long-view/ which has the 2pp going back decades. Rudd Labor popularity is unprecedented, in part due to the fact Howard’s extreme-rightism has made them unelectable for the next 10-20 years. Even Hawke/Keating got 13 years.

  30. The sort of numbers I would expect from a one year old Government that has made a few mistakes and is facing large problems.

  31. “The sort of numbers I would expect from a one year old Government” – except it has never happened before?

    I don’t know where that comment came from mexicanbeemer… wishful thinking?

  32. bob1234, it might be happening in WA at the moment for all we know. Perhaps today’s society is more likely to stick strongly with new governments?

  33. just saw mr workchoices on channel 10 news still rabbiting on about ‘phonegate’ one thing I noticed he appeared to be slightly slimmer, is he on a diet?, is there a challenge in the air? should truffles be looking behind his back?

  34. Finns

    Saw the video.

    Your after-Machupicchu glow is going to be dimmed somewhat in the near future. Expect a call from some very pissed off Peruvian drug-lords. I hear they are not very forgiving when they find out who’s been stealing their coke and sleeping with their women. They seem happy to make the trip to meet you. I can’t imagine who told them all those terrible things about you…. 😀

  35. The Galaxy Poll results are (a) good results for Rudd basically but (b) not so good results either. The basic news (55%tpp) is good. The downward move is beyond MOU, and not so good. The ratings on the economy and inflation are, to put it simply, not so good, and may be an indication that the electorate may have Rudd on notice if the economy stalls. Notable is that about 15% of the electorate is sticking with green and other combined.

  36. Can anyone explain why Rudd’s Christmas bonus is not just a shameful vote bribe from Kevin masquerading as Father Christmas? If it’s to stimulate the economy, why is it means tested? Don’t couples with children earning over $150,000 (or whatever it is) spend money at Christmas?

    And before you all say “Because they don’t need it”, may I remind you that’s my point. Because they don’t need it, they will spend it and stimulate the economy. Aren’t they more likely to spend it than people earning less?

  37. [Aren’t they more likely to spend it than people earning less?]

    Remember a significant amount is going to pensioners who will spend it. I’m not sure about low-middle income families. I assume a significant proportion will spend it and some will save. I think the high income families/singles will spend anyway, so there’s not really a need to shore them up.

  38. [I think the high income families/singles will spend anyway, so there’s not really a need to shore them up.]
    The stimulus to the economy purely comes from how much of the $1000 they spend. Thorsten Veblen would argue that the leisure class are more likely to spend that money than the working class.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 21
1 2 3 21