Morgan: 59.5-40.5

The latest fortnightly Morgan face-to-face poll has not replicated the Newspoll bounce, but that’s cold comfort for the Coalition as they still trail 59.5-40.5, unchanged from last time. The Greens are up three points on the primary vote to 10.5 per cent. Labor’s primary vote is down from 50.5 per cent to 48.5 per cent and the Coalition is down from 35.5 per cent to 34.5 per cent.

We also have Newspoll’s latest quarterly aggregation of polling broken down by state and age group. The outstanding features is a picture of relative Labor weakness in New South Wales, consistent with the theme that the state government is damaging their brand there. Charts galore from Possum.

In other news, 65-year-old back-bencher Philip Ruddock has made the surprise announcement that he plans to run again in his blue-ribbon Sydney seat of Berowra. However, he seems in some danger of being blasted out by the state party’s vigorous Right faction, which did so much to contribute to the party’s success at the last election.

UPDATE: By popular demand, here’s a chart showing how Labor’s two-party vote has tracked across Newspoll, Morgan and Essential Research this year. I only have figures going back to June for Essential, and have generally only used every second poll for Morgan and Essential to keep the figures concurrent with Newspoll. Alternatively, you could just look at Possum’s chart dump, which includes ACNielsen.

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.

923 comments on “Morgan: 59.5-40.5”

Comments Page 17 of 19
1 16 17 18 19
  1. Diogenes “To all the hardline Labor apologists out there (Ron I’m looking at you)”

    You cann’t even appologise for th pathetic Obama …because he does not even hav a 2020 target !! (nor does he suport Kyoto ratification either , thats where World Leadership & econamics start)

    Yous rusted on Obamaphiles hurt CC , and you’ll wear it

    Its great that Rudd , unlike th pathetic Obama , has put 15% on table to negotiate Further he put an ETS on table today And some of you other panicking guys must not hav read th Green Paper in july on ETS , white announsed today There is actualy an ETS from July 2010 with bands and initial compensations for industry transitions Suggest you read it , its all about CC & th biggest econamic change in 20 years , too much knee jerk reactions

  2. Mexicanbeemer I think you and others are missing a lot of the facts when it comes to climate change.

    We can’t just say “Yeah it’s a good policy, gets the balance right, I’ll pay a few bucks”.

    That doesn’t make any sense. It’s not about “balance”. There will not be any jobs in the future if we don’t do something right now.

  3. I hope you’re right GB. But in the meantime, I have sent of emails to Kevin, Penny and my local member (Perrett) expressing my disappointment

  4. [nor does he suport Kyoto ratification either ]
    Yes he does, so did John McCain. Go do some reading Ron.
    [Yous rusted on Obamaphiles hurt CC , and you’ll wear it ]
    Stop being a moronic Ruddophile Ron.

  5. [I really don’t think some of you get it. What good is introducing a scheme that has bugger all chance of getting past the Senate and every chance of making this a one term government, thus bringing in a government that is far less committed to the cause? This is a chance to gradually get into the business of addessing climate change and maintaining a government that is committed to going in harder in the future. Start with small steps, bring the crowd with you then progress to larger steps.
    I’m actually surprised there are intelligent people here who don’t see that or want to see that.]

    I totally agree.

    Can anyone remember the CFMEU & the Timber Workers in Tasmania giving Howard a Hero’s welcome during the 2004 Federal Election when Latham proposed a ban on Logging of Old Growth Forests ?? I can well imagine Turnball doing the same thing this time around.

    Baby steps, people, baby steps.

  6. This is a 5% to 15% reduction in 15 years, with a huge push for renewable energy. So actual reduction by 2020 should be greater than the 15%, also the 15% is a flexible figure depending on Copenhagen in December 09.
    Rudd has kept another one of his promises.

  7. hey Ron
    i heard Kev say that Oil’s target at present is 0% by 2020
    seems his adoring fans are fine with that but wanna put the boot into the Ruddster for 5-15%

  8. polyquats -If you listened to Rudd carefully his intention is to go harder down the track. You can’t pull up your pants if you haven’t got them on and that is what this whitepaper is all about. At the moment Australia is not wearing any CC pants. We need to at least get them around our ankles first.
    [I have sent of emails to Kevin, Penny and my local member (Perrett) expressing my disappointment]
    I’m sure many will exercise the same right plyquats but I’m equally sure there will be those expressing the opposite opinion to you.

  9. Today was about PM Rudd taking ownership of the climate change debate, he has set sn easy short term target while holding out the carrot for a higher target if an Internation agreement can be created, this is smart politics.

    Sure some may want more but lets recall the objective here is too acheive several things

    1) Too carry the people, making larger gains down the road earier to acheive.
    2) Neutalise the issue politically in terms of making Turnbulls position harder
    3) Ensuring that the first steps don’t wreck the economy, if this policy was allowed to wreck the econmy two things would happen, the people would reject any future reductions and the ALP would be back in opposition.
    4) The Government can now focus on obtaining an Internation solution, if that can be done then Rudd will be seen as an Internation statement, enhancing his poition politically and strenghten Australias position both economically and politically.

  10. Politically, this is a smart move by Rudd.

    He can only win votes by moving to the right on an issue like the ETS. The nature of our political system is that Green voters who don’t like his ETS ultimately have to make a choice – vote for the 5% ETS (Labor) or vote for no ETS (Liberal). Seems like a simple choice IMHO…

  11. Socrates

    I agree that we were lucky to have a special 108% target and able to include the
    fact of stopping the completely obscene Qld land clearing practices in that.

    I did not want to suggest that Australia has been doing its fair share already: it has
    done virtually nothing until now.

    However, the figures in the white paper are for per capita reductions against the 1990 emissions and they say that with the CPRS we are aiming for a 34% per capita reduction and the EU is only aiming for a 24% on 1990 levels (and apparently that includes a lot of imported offsets from Africa).

    Certainly we are bad polluters and will have to go much further soon after 2020 if not before.

    And, Diogenes, I agree that one should not be inconsistent about when to use per capita figures and when not. I just think that we should always use per capita figures
    and we have to accept that thus we are some of the worse polluters in the world and have the furthest to go in the medium term in reducing our pollution.

    But I still say it is interesting that the CPRS will head us in the right direction in making some of the biggest unilateral per capita cuts yet announced in the world.

  12. [If you listened to Rudd carefully his intention is to go harder down the track]

    I think the problem many of us have with it is covered in that sentence right there. His ‘intention’. I know it was likely that the scheme would start of low and ramp up, but without specifics as to the nature of that ramp up it all seems a bit weak.

  13. [Baby steps, people, baby steps.]

    Yeah that might have made sense 20 years ago, but there isn’t time for “baby steps”. Rudd said he would take leadership on the issue but he’s done nothing but sabotage the talks at Pozdan and acquiesce to the coal lobby.

    You still don’t seem to understand. If we don’t reduce our emissions by at least 25% by 2020, that’s it. Game over. No Murray Darling, no Great Barrier Reef. That’s the threshold. After that point, feedback starts kicking in and we’ll need to be virtually carbon neutral within 5 years after that once we cross that threshold. And even then immense damage will be caused.

  14. Check out all the Bludgers chucking a dummy spit lol. You blokes just don’t know how to win?

    Sure it’s about cleaning the planet, but we must act responsibly economically as well. It’s like running a Melbourne Cup. You blokes want to run the first 800m in Doncaster Hcp time, you will finish near last.

    If you want to win, you must employ the right tactics, for the climate and economically relative to the rest of the world. I reckon even Bob Brown knows that deep down.

  15. [but we must act responsibly economically as well.]

    Centre, how many jobs do you think rely on the GBR? On Australia’s rivers? How many lives rely on the current balance in the environment?

  16. [We would be abel to cut twice as much if we went nuclear.]

    As has already been pointed out, the lead time for nuclear is such that it wouldn’t give us any cuts before 2020.

  17. We could cut three times as much and it wouldn’t make any difference depending on the rest of the world. We are doing what we should responsibly, and we are a player, which is much much more than what the Liberals ever did.

  18. [We could cut three times as much and it wouldn’t make any difference depending on the rest of the world]

    Yes Centre, but how should we expect the rest of the world to cut by 20-25% to save our resources when we can’t even be bothered too?

    [much more than what the Liberals ever did.]

    Yes, the billions of dollars the government is giving to aluminium and coal industries is much more than the Liberals ever gave.

  19. Vera

    “hey Ron
    i heard Kev say that Oil’s target at present is 0% by 2020
    Seems his adoring fans are fine with that but wanna put the boot into the Ruddster for 5-15%”

    Cause Vera they they use double standards They locked themselves into suporting Obama whose WRITTEN policy does NOT say suport Kyoto mark 11 ratification (Edwards & Hillary’s written policys DO) and Obama has in POTUS contest made NO 2020 target at all !!! Despite my warnings that US leadership was crucial & that Obama’s and McCain’s) pathetic stanse would hurt CC Copenhaggen negotiations , and now its happened , they’ve got red faces

    Also Vera , despite panic merchants here , CC action has started with th RET and ETS schemes BOTH solely aimed at reducing our Co2 emmissions IRRESPECTIVE of th rest of World What Rudd now will be dog is phoning th pathetic Obama and saying (rightly) yous ar th econamic power , thats where CC leadership has to come from…I’ve put up a variable target an RET and an ETC , and now Mr Obama instead of pretty yap time for you to put up

    Rudd has done sensible thingy today , we ar not immune from rest of world globisation , and aint gonna get ripped of like we hav in lowering Tarrifs when US etc did NOT equitably..and today still rip off our farmers and exporters

    Keep th faith Vera , its warranted…rudd has actual acted today for CC and wisely on CC and econamics for this Country with both th RET and ETS schemes and th variable negotiating target Forget th ex Obamaphiles and/or th nutty Greens and psedo Intelectuals here Some Labor people here jumped to quick to criticise Rudd’s wiseness to reduce CC

  20. HAHAHAHAHAHAH 5% HAHAHAHAHAAHA geee think of the cuts he could have announced had he announced we’d be going for Nuclear Energy lol!

    Ahh Ruddster classic effort today!

  21. HAHAHAHAHAHAH 5% HAHAHAHAHAAHA geee think of the cuts he could have announced had he announced we’d be going for Nuclear Energy lol!

    Yup – that’s all you could do – imagine them . . . clean coal, sustainable nuclear, tooth fairy . . .

  22. Centaur…this is the best Rudd could offer even with encouraging renewables, we’d be able to cut emissions by far more if we had Nuclear Energy…

    Anyway 5% cut is a conservative measure…something Howard probably would have done had he won in 2007….so it doesnt bother me as much as it will the left.

  23. Yes softly softly does make sense, but he could have squeezed in a little more 7-10%. It will just make it harder to adjust later, although leaving the door open for 15% makes good sense.

  24. Glen I’m not sure I’d be laughing if I was you. Where does this leave the Liberal Party? ROYALLY WEDGED LOL!

    Amazing how what goes around comes around!

  25. getting the ETS off the ground early I think is even more important than delaying it and having a bigger cut. It can be adjusted rejigged according to how it all transpires.
    Clean coal is just drying the stuff before it gets burnt. There is some 40% reduction in CO2 emissions just from that. The other option is gas fired power stations. This alsois a product of brown coal, which will produce gas, water(used for industry) and coking coal.
    Nuclear takes far too long to get going Glen and still has many risks.

  26. No Turnbull and Hunt could say look if we pushed for Nuclear we could cut emissions by 15%-20% without any damage to the economy…thus wedging the ALP lol!

  27. Diogenes

    Actually MayoFeral wins.

    I’d much rather have won a chook raffle! 🙁

    People can dress this up as much as they want, but this is a sad day.

    I’m amazed at the number of posts banging on about it not costing Labor votes. Hell, Rudd could achieve that by just throwing a party for everyone. Go and look at the Reef before it vanishes and then ask yourself how many votes is it worth? Check out Kakadu, and ask yourself the same question. Do you depend on the Murray-Darling Basis for your water, food or job? Well how many votes is all that worth to you?

    The only thing about dying I’ve been unhappy about is not knowing how the human story unfolds. If I live as long as my Dad then I have quite a while left but I’m not expecting to make it to his nearly 101. I figure I have maybe 15 years tops. Long enough, I suspect, to have the answer before popping my clogs. Indeed, today has already confirmed my growing certainty that it’ll be Easter Island all over again.

    If the government of a wealthy country that is the one most likely to come through the GFC in very good shape but has the most to loose from GW, which enjoys record poll ratings and has strong popular support for action on CC lacks the courage to do more than the p*ssweak effort announced today, then what hope is there that other less fortunate nations with indifferent governments and people will bite the bullet? Instead of sending them a strong message we’ve just handed them a golden excuse to continue doing SFA!

  28. Oz

    Australia’s population has already increased over 30% on 1990 levels and the rate of increase has increased. It seems 45% increase 1990 to 2020 is a reasable estimate.

    I know that many readers have not seen arguments about per capita carbon emissions before but they are the important values to concentrate on as we aim for fair reductions over the next few decades.

  29. Smart tactic today in my view. Rudd has wedged the “Liberals” rightly (pun intended).

    By his moving to the right, it leaves the Liberals going where themselves, but further out to the right … to the territory occupied by the truly kooky rusted-on denialists. The Liberals won’t pick up any votes there that they don’t already have, and they will lose some of the small l liberals who still support them.

    In a few years time, when it has come to be seen that the ETS was not the end of the world as the Liberals and denialists keep prophesying, by which time the world economy should have picked up, it will be easier to slipstream in more stringent targets, as the need determines.

  30. We are a tiny emitter compared to the rest of the world. If we aggressively cut emissions and the largest polluters did not follow suit, our cost of living would increase substantially for no benefit. What a quick way to get back on the opposition benches. And what was the real coalition policy, go nuclear with no benefits to the climate for zonks of years.

    As I said before, you have got to know how to win!

  31. [In a few years time, when it has come to be seen that the ETS was not the end of the world as the Liberals and denialists keep prophesying, by which time the world economy should have picked up, it will be easier to slipstream in more stringent targets, as the need determines.]

    Sounds like a bunch of excuses and wisful thinking to me. It’s not going to happen. The Government will roll over to big business at every step of the way.

  32. Would just like to register my absolute astonishment that Conroy could exclude Telstra from the NBN RFP process. Absolute idiocy from the minister.

  33. No 843

    Nuclear is the only way to go to get wholesale cuts in emissions. Alternatively, we can wait another 1000 years for solar to catch up.

  34. Hell Generic Person

    I’ve got you and Glen to my right and th FL/intellegentsia in th left uneconamic un reel world politc fringe zone

  35. From MayoFeral at #838
    “Do you depend on the Murray-Darling Basis for your water, food or job? Well how many votes is all that worth to you? ”

    Yes we do.
    Sort of. Well we would if there was water there to use.
    There is no water there now so we have to buy it at $600 for for 20,000 litres.
    Climate change [now what the hell is that?] has decreased our rainfall by about 20-30% per annum over the last 20-30 years and looks like getting worse, so our rain collection and storage is inadequate.

    Its worth 2 votes to anyone but the ALP and the Coalition [and excluding the fundies too of course].
    Which leaves …..who?
    Its also worth whatever votes 2 persons gained for the ALP by putting in a thousand hours of effort into helping an ALP candidate at ’07.
    Thats not going to happen again.

  36. GP,

    Disagree re the exclusion of Telstra. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of monopolist bast*rds.

    I’m sure they will buy themselves back in to the game at some point (taking over one of the applicants is always a possibility). So your tears of disappointment for McGauchie and Sol will probably be wasted.

    In the meantime, Conroy can bask in the glory of taking a bully down a peg or two in the interests of the Australian community. More power to his arm, I say!

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 17 of 19
1 16 17 18 19