Comments thread chat informs us that the headline result of an ACNielsen poll to be published in tomorrow’s Fairfax broadsheets has been revealed by Laurie Oakes on the Channel Nine news. This has Labor’s lead two-party lead at 57-43 compared with 55-45 last month. More details as they come to hand. There is also reason to believe tomorrow’s edition of The West Australian will feature one of its small-sample Westpoll surveys of voting intention at the Poll Bludger’s end of the continent; if so, you will read about it here in the small hours of the morning EST.
UPDATE: Sydney Morning Herald report here, though no detail yet beyond that provided by Oakes.
UPDATE 2: Primary vote figures at the Sydney Morning Herald: Labor up from 44 per cent to 49 per cent, Coalition down from 41 per cent to 39 per cent. Kevin Rudd’s approval rating is up 8 per cent to equal its March high of 67 per cent, “pushing him ahead of the pre-election ratings achieved by Malcolm Fraser in 1975 and Bob Hawke in 1983”. Remarkably, the Prime Minister’s approval rating remains steady at a more than respectable 50 per cent.
386 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 8 » Show All
As someone was suggesting earlier (Nostra?) pollies should really learn when it`s time to go. Sadly, so few of them seem to. 2 recent examples (bracks, carr) of state leaders bowing out while on top. Can anyone remember the last PM (or even opposition leader) to do so?
Welcome back Glen - I have to admire your courage. In the same way I will admire Howards concession speech. It take guts and shows conviction.
Guys & Gals, it’s perceptions, not policies that non-politicals vote on!
Right now the perception is that Rudd is a quiet, reasonable Guy who can be trusted not to embarass us internationally, not to wreck the economy, to restore a little balance to IR, and maybe get us going on the environment (but not too quickly).
The Libs might be able to change this, but I don’t think so.
Prognosis?
Election 3Rd Nov
ALP 56% TPP
Seat majority 25+
#182 Albert, thank God the ALP don`t have to play a semi-final against the Wallabies.
Yeah good work Glen. Is there any truth to the rumour, recently started by myself, that William is paying you to comment now - to stop this site becoming a completely left-wing love-in? Cash for comments scandal hits Pollbludger!
Swing
I know he said “average”, i stated that previously. I also understand that this is a pretty ordinary promise and viewers may think “So? The coalition does now anyway”
It still doesn’t answer the accusation by Swan that Costello has overtaxed then overspent. By ensuring an AVERAGE surplus, you are still expecting that, over the long haul, there will be money left at the end of each tax year, where possible. The only way to guarantee this, ahead of time, is to go long on revenue estimates… colloquially called “overtaxing”.
You cannot have your cake and eat it.
Either:
1. What the coalition is doing is OK (because we intend to do the same thing) OR
2. The coalition is overtaxing, we won’t but we assure you the economy will be good enough for surpluses
Point 2 will bite them, if used, because not 6 months ago, Kevin & Wayne shared the mantra that the economic boom won’t last forever, in reference to the government’s IR laws.
There is contradictory economic logic in these statements that cannot easily be resolved. Just as well the electorate have goldfish-like memories!!
Boll,
How does an Opposition Leader bow out whilst on top?
The last PM to do so was Menzies in 1966.
GLEN, the claim that Rudd said he’d already won the election came from Downer, now very few people give any credence to anything Downer says, especially after the french/mandarin tanty, nobody, but nobody, is going to listen to ANYTHING he says after that, he was backed up by Howard, well theres the man who has been labled a lying rodent by his own side, everyone will just shrug on that one and think– well of course he’d say that.
theres not one person come forward to verify that statement, if as they claim Rudd was spouting it to journos, editors and businessmen then we’d have heard about it loud and long by now.
Swampy
Good point. I think Rudd knows exactly how challenging this is, though he is probably sleeping better every night polls like this keep trending in..
Will I see AC Neilson on line before I go to bed?
186
Generic Oracle Says:
September 9th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
Saw Kevin on the telly tonight. I think he has a soft spot for me..
What surprised me is that in the Crosby-Textor report I read on Friday, giving a clear analysis of who “owned†which topics in terms of perception, I thought economic management was still weakly a plus for the government.
This ad, however, gave assurances from Kevin Rudd that he would keep budgets in surplus, on average and that he would keep interest rates under control….
Generic, this is part of the process that Rudd has used all year to poach supporters from Howard: where there is a positive, Rudd positions himself alongside Howard. This may not win immediate support for Rudd, but gives him an aura of safety, creating pathways for the future migration of support.
Where Howard has a high negative ranking, Rudd establishes ‘politico-visual’ and ‘rhetorical’ distance between himself and Howard. The result is voters detach themselves from Howard and re-attach themselves to Rudd. In an elementary way, Rudd now “stands for” things voters like, while more and more, Howard “stands for” things they dislike.
When Howard has tried to move away from established value patterns, Rudd has sometimes followed him - to Howard’s annoyance, like a damned shadow - and sometimes just made a superior offer. The Tasmanian Hospital takeover is a good example of the latter: Howard made an unorthodox offer that doesn’t address the whole health story, and Rudd devalued it by offering a possible total health remake. Howard appears like he is offering a sunday carboot sale while Rudd appears like he is willing to build a chain of carparks…Who looks better?
This is why His Excellency The Foreign Minister is so pissed off with Rudd: he is running rings around them. No wonder the Liberals don’t know what to do now either, because Rudd is the front-runner and has all the high positives while Howard has the high negatives AND the high expectations. The Liberals gambled that time would be their ally, but it’s turned out to be their worst enemy….very funny really…oh the woe, the woe!
The really funny thing, to my mind, was Tony Abbott declaring that he and Howard and company were the First Eleven of Australian politics and therefore should be allowed to run everything. What a farce!
Generic Oracle,
From what I have heard from Labor so far, when they say “overtaxed then overspent”, they’re saying that they’ve taxed too much (which admittedly is slightly iffy economics, but the argument could be made that a $17 bn surplus is evidence of overtaxing) and that they’ve spent too much in a boom period for the economy (which is an economically sound argument - you’re supposed to save in boom periods).
What Labor seems to be suggesting is that they will lower the overall tax revenue (though I have no idea what they’re plans are about this) and will then find spending cuts by cutting pork. Well, that’s my interpretation at least…
The problem with Howard stepping down is that it wont help them win, may help them save a little, and could just as easily cause a hemorrhage of votes against them. There are no doubt many Howard faithful voting Liberal only because of him. There are also many that detest Costello and will jump if he takes over. Therefore their is great risk in Howard leaving the fray.
Similarly if Howard and Co or anyone for that matter [it will be assumed to have come from the Govt] start smearing Labor then the result could be the same - an increase in Labor’s vote.
From the beginning of the year the Govt and their sycophant press supporters failed to pick up until too late that attacking Labor increased its vote. Beautiful!
The Govt is in quick sand - the more it struggles the deeper and quicker it sinks. Its only safe bet is to try and limit the damage by going to the polls quickly and acting like gentlemen.
You seemed to imply that you think Costello has the best chance of minimising the loss. I feel that Howard has the best chance of minimising the loss. If Rudd wins I still think he is more likely to win by 10 or 20 than 1 - 9.
Swing
I understand your clarification about overtaxing but do you see what I mean about having it both ways?? In truth, they will do the same thing.
Swan has complained about the spending, but intends not to rollback on government commitments to date. How important is the issue to him then??
I also take your point about the boom and Howard has presided over a larger bureaucracy and greater welfare spends in areas like family payments and childcare subsidies. However, I think the numbers fixate in the electorate’s mind: Valid or not, they remember “17%” (”Keating’s” interest rates), “96 Billion AUD” (the “inherited debt” from Labor) and the fact that the Coalition has perpetuity funds set up to finance Govt Super, Universities and now other ones coming online.
Older voters will have the “financial prudence” perception of the coalition, which will be hard to shake. I think it is suicidal to attempt to paint the coalition as spenders and Labor as thrifty. History has not shown this and, to make matters worse, all Australian voters have a closer Labor model, in the state Labor government, which does not paint the “financial prudence” claim. It may backfire BADLY.
If an election is called this week, I hope the old tradition of announcing the date to the house is restored. I think the last time was in 1977 but I still remember Gough’s Austerlitz speech in 1972 - one of his very best.
ruawake says at post 37:
“Janet Albrechtsen considers herself a “commentator†bye bye ABC board.
She is about to become irrelevant.”
I dunno mate, I reckon she can still get a gig at Guns & Ammo Quarterly as their political correspondent.
#214 Generic Oracle Says:I think it is suicidal to attempt to paint the coalition as spenders and Labor as thrifty. History has not shown this and,
Actually, I think they’re going to be able to do it pointing at the facts, and with good reason. This is the largest taxing government in history, and spending that money in pork-barrelling tax-cuts is going to lead to inflation and higher interest rates.
Are you going to cut taxes and raise interest rates, or spend money on education an infrastructure, and compete with the ALP on its own turf?
Reverse-wedge.
Generic O,
I agree - it would probably be suicidal for Labor to attempt to paint themselves with the “financial prudence” claim. What Swan is really doing is trying to defuse the issue completely - agree with what the government is saying so they can’t attack Labor over it. That way, Labor can concentrate on its stronger areas of attack (eg, broadband, climate change, Howard being “mean and tricky”, etc)
Not sure about the Coalition perpetuity funds being a political positive for them, though. People seem to want the money to be spent NOW rather than locked up in a fund to be spent in the future.
If the Liberals win from here then God truelly is a right-wing nut job coz they’ll need some miracle, Tampa or something. But God won’t get old testament on us. Jesus was a good old Christian Socialist, certainly not an economic rationalist fear mungerer.
Acts of the Apostles at chapter 2 and verses 42, 44, and 45:
42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and in fellowship … 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (King James Version)
The theme is reiterated in Acts 4:32-37:
32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. 36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. (King James Version)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism
Prosperity Doctrine is rubbish, whatever happened to “the love of money is the ruit of all evils”.
Strange then how its the right-wingers who so often turn to religion for justification (of their bigotry against gays, etc.) whilest lefties are more likely to be secular (and when they do get religious tend to avoid the smighting bits).
Pi
Look, even the State Labor governments have bought into the whole “surplus” shine. Peter Beattie boasted about his surplus BUT increased Queensland’s debt load. He drew ire from the press and scepticism from the public by doing this. With State Labor examples like this, it leaves Federal Labor WIDE open.
By contrast, the coalition managed surpluses without resorting to debt. Now it is always good politics to attack either taxation or book balancing. You always have an argument on hand. Too many surpluses? You are taking too much tax! Too many deficits? You can’t handle the budget!
You are right about the Coalition and tax take. Dead right. Again, the numbers resonate. Many voters will be recalling 48% top tax rates under Labor and lower rates all the way down now. The fact that they have more of their income exposed to the moderate bands alludes most voters (who don’t even understand scaled taxation anyway!).
Again, I’d just worry that this line of attack is too greasy and too hard to form a sincere perception out of in the voter’s mind.
I wonder what Antonio Gramsci would have to say about the “Howard Battlers”.
Molotov
Wow, interesting post. I think this is the main reason why the “Religious Right” tag doesn’t wash as well in Australia.
As the learned Chris Curtis has informed us here, the roots are very different and the DLP and FFP experience has shown a real dedication to social justice and compassion. Even Kevin Rudd has written on the same principle, in a bid to win support from the Christian Community.
He wouldn’t get the support if there weren’t socially responsible Christians out there, I’d imagine.
As a result of this site, I have begun supporting FFP, mostly from a policy platform and, actually, Bryan Palmer’s Political Inclinations Test here:
http://www.ozpolitics.info/guide/fun/politics-test/
Now, I understand that Steve Fielding is a Christian and he has certainly caught the coalition off guard with some votes, particularly the offshore detention issue. Apparently, Steve was the perplexed one and wondered what people expected of him. Compassion to the poor and politically downtrodden was one of the key attributes of Christ, as I understand it. Anyway, I was also impressed at his stand.
He has also been vitriolic about Howard’s Workchoices from the start, believing, rightly, that those least able to negotiate their own way are the ones that need the most protection, usually the “poor”. Sharyn Burrows applauded Fielding in the senate, apparently, and holds him in very high regard. Now if that ain’t strange bedfellows, I don’t know what is.
Whatever that “prosperity thing” is you mentioned, I doubt that this guy buys into it!!
My point was that Howard stepping down could just as easily cause more damage. Also I get the feeling [and it has been this way all year] that if the Govt and its mates produce a negative campaign it might end up costing them more votes.
I believe they should go to the polls quick and act like gentlmen. The fact that Labor seem to actually be increasing their vote should be a warning to the Govt to not assume any return of votes by waiting longer. Rudd is starting to focus on some safer Liberal seats so obviously he thinks given time they could do better.
It seems like Rudd has been working out his plan for years.
Generic Oracle
It is remarkable that when history is examined that those examples that support ones argument are the examples that are brought forward. The examples that do not support us are ignored.
I can remember a top marginal rate under the conservatives of 60%.
I am not old enough to know who brought it in or when it was brought in but in I think the Hawke Government lowered it but I could be mistaken.
The same thing has occurred with interest rates. All say that Labor is the hight interest rates party but Frazer/Howard had higher interest rates. So why are not the Liberal tagged with this negative rather then Labor.
One thing that is ignored is not the high and lows that occur in the economic cycle but how a Government handles these fluctuations that always occur. Maybe a high interest rate or a high tax rate is the medication that the economy requires.
Now The Oz is reporting that Howard is going to wait a couple of weeks:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22390609-601,00.html
“government sources said the Prime Minister might wait another two weeks to call the election to attack the Opposition Leader during the two-week parliamentary session starting tomorrow.”
Generic Oracle
If you think that projects like the Snowy Mountain scheme were financed without debt, you’re not as smart as I think you are.
If you think Australia isn’t sinking further into debt with every monthly trade deficit, you’re not as smart as I think you are.
If you think that the debt is now corporate, rather than governmental, you’d be right.
If you think that the debt is being used to finance urgently needed infrastructure, IMO you’re blind.
In my view, the foreign debt is being used to push housing prices beyond the reach of Australians.
But, Generic Oracle, I don’t think the voters are doing to give a rats about our learned (?) debate. They see unaffordable housing, Hospitals and Transport in crisis, no action on the environment, no job security,. They’re going to kick backside!
Sydney Morning Herald
‘Despite Mr Howard’s moment on the world’s stage, the poll, taken from Thursday to Saturday, shows Labor leading the Coalition on a two-party-preferred basis by 57 per cent to 43 per cent.
This is a four-point widening of the gap for Labor over the past month, enough to annihilate the Government if an election were held now. The election is due to be called within weeks.
Labor has increased its primary vote lead by 5 percentage points and is now besting the Coalition by 49 per cent to 39 per cent.
More than 60 per cent of voters believe Labor will win the election. Fewer than 30 per cent are backing the Government.
Mr Rudd has equalled the record he set in March as the most popular opposition leader in the poll’s 35-year history.
His approval rating shot up 8 points to 67 per cent, pushing him ahead of the pre-election ratings achieved by Malcolm Fraser in 1975 and Bob Hawke in 1983.’
Hhhahahaha Shanahan is funny, this is how he starts his article today:
“Howard’s not stepping down and he’s not rushing to an election this week, despite rumours and febrile fears within the Coalition.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22390623-17301,00.html
HE was the one that started the rumours on Saturday that the election was going to be called this Wednesday.
Who gives a rats,
The top marginal rate of income tax was reduced from 66% to 47% by Hawke (Keating as treasurer). At the same time a specific capital gains tax was introduced, and the double taxation of dividends (company tax plus tax on dividends in the hands of shareholders) was abolished.
So modern Labor certainly has a claim as a major player in tax reform.
Frank Calabrese,
If the current NSW cops couldn’t organise a root in a brothel, their (probably more corrupt) predecessors were certainly particularly adept at that task, and could also be relied upon to organise a piss-up in a brewery.
The declining efficiency to which you allude is a disgrace.
This says it all I think…
“All impressions of Howard as yesterday’s man, and Rudd as tomorrow’s, were reinforced.â€
http://www.smh.com.au/news/apec/analysis/2007/09/09/1189276546444.html
Probably the Govt plans to try some smear in parliament. We know they are able to lie, tell half truths and create faked documentation [aka Kirby] and certainly there are a few sick sycophant journos who would be willing to make the sacrifice of making up stories.
Remember this govt orchestrated the SAS raid on the Tampa, lied over and over on Children Overboard was willing to bribe a dictator under sanctions to sell wheat, happy to keep Hicks locked up for years to keep Bush happy and willing to see Habib tortured for no good reason, and willing to force the feds to bring charges against Haneef.
And who knows maybe the Bush Administration is happy to create a terrorist attack. The USA govt has never been too shy to install the govts they want in other places so a littel shennanigans in Aust would be simple for them - if they had the will and reason.
I wouldn’t underestimate just how desperate to win this govt is.
On a more positive note the longer the govt waits the more votes it might end up losing.
The main reasons for Rudd’s popularity is simply that…
A - the media love him and hardly lift a finger to question him or scrutinise his actions or his policies to the same degree they do to the Coalition.
B - he has very little record and thus we dont know anything about him nothing positive, nothing negative.
C - he’s never had to make a tough decision as leader of the Opposition, he hasnt been tested in the heat of the moment and from what we’ve seen he turns into a mumbling wreck when trying to explain himself…
D - no non right wing media press gallery journo is willing to come down hard on his or his team’s inexperience.
E - the media have long called the election reinforcing that Howard is a goner has just made it ‘popular’ to jump on the Ruddwagon.
Howard wont resign and i dont think he’ll call an election next week either…he would have to be a fool to call an election being around 10 points down by the recent polls…the election if it is forced out of Howard will look worse than him deciding by his terms when it will be…
If Rudd wins he’ll have rewritten the history books for several reasons….
A - Governments dont lose when the economy is very strong.
B - Opposition’s dont win with a leader whose been in for less than 1 year…Hawke had adequate leadership experience being head of the ACTU for years beforehand.
C - the most inexperienced front bench whom even Labor supporters would struggle to name more than half a dozen….would be the first in many many years…
Why wont Mr Rudd give us a tax policy…if Labor are fair dinkum about running the country why wont they tell us Swan wont because he’s gutless and so is Rudd they wont tell us because they must have something unpopular in store…if we had 9 consecutive interest rate rises how is someone so inexperienced as Swan going to make things any better he’ll probably make them much much worse…neither do i sense a hatred at this government by average Australians like they did with Keating…
But in point of fact Labor should have lost in 1993 they got out of jail and Keating knew it…so perhaps 10 years is the true life span of a Government and Labor just go lucky…the question is will Howard be as lucky as Keating?
Peter Fuller @#229
Thanks Peter. I could not remember the details and at this time of the night I was too lazy to go looking for it.
Dennis Shanahan September 10, 2007 Howard is not a man in a hurry
‘This doesn’t mean there isn’t still concern about the sudden lurch to Labor in last week’s Newspoll or that there wasn’t some serious consideration given to whether it would be better for Howard to go, it just means the Liberal hierarchy has decided it’s best for him to stay.
That’s even after the AC Nielsen poll published in the Fairfax press today confirmed the Newspoll trend to the ALP’
Would spoil the fun to reproduce the whole of his article.
Re comment 228 - it’s hard to know whether it’s Shanahan or his sources in the Government who are most out of touch. He says:
For a start, December 2 is a Sunday - not a possible election day. And secondly, if the Government explicitly mentions economic management credentials, then unfortunately the voters will instantly think ‘interest rates’. That’s why they’ve shut up about it lately.
And over at the SMH, Philip Coorey has a better explanation about why an election won’t be called this week: “Sources said there was no chance of the election being called this week, if only because the Liberal Party had not yet organised postal voting arrangements and, in NSW, was yet to select candidates for about nine Labor-held seats.”
Why worry about finding candidates for Labor held seats? Just throwing money away they could use elsewhere.
230
WhoGivesaRats Says:
September 10th, 2007 at 1:01 am
This says it all I think…
“All impressions of Howard as yesterday’s man, and Rudd as tomorrow’s, were reinforced.â€
http://www.smh.com.au/news/apec/analysis/2007/09/09/1189276546444.html
Yes, WGR, Howard is the Liberal’s strongest card, but also the source of their weakness. It is a paradox, but they cannot compete without Howard and - most likely - they cannot win with him.
It is well to remember too, that Howard has not always been a winner….
Canberra Boy: Perhaps they don’t have the money to campaign in those seats, especially after losing the NSW elections. The NSW branch should of known there was going to be an election this year. I wouldn’t doubt that latter today or by Tuesday the state exec will have apointed candidates.
I wouldn’t doubt Rudd going on the offense with attacking Howard for not dealing with the Lib MPs that are under investigation. This will be a liability for them should an election be called, and the ALP will only have to campaign saying something along the lines of ‘If you elect them, and they’re charge by the AFP then a bielection will be needed, so just vote for us’.
Phil Coorey in the SMH is saying that there definately won’t be an election called this week:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/damned-if-he-does-damned-if-he-doesnt/2007/09/09/1189276542059.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
“The only certainty yesterday was that there would be no election called this week.”
And on Howard:
“”There’s a fair chance he might be going. He’s seriously thinking about it,” said one confidant. “My expectation is he won’t but I wouldn’t be surprised if he does.”
“Should Howard go, the “deal” was for Peter Costello to become leader and Downer his deputy. Costello, we were being told, does not want the leadership now but would have to take it if offered.”
But then the article says that Liberal polling has them ahead in most seats!
“The Government believes is has a good message to sell. There are some who still think it can beat Labor. The internal polling shows it ahead of Labor in a majority of seats.”
I just can’t believe that!
re westpoll
“The variation in support for the major parties over recent months seems incredible. The August ’07 results represented a dramatic fall in support for the Coalition, and this seemed to be the low point for the trend that had been building since the June result. An examination of the “History of voting intent†graph elsewhere on this site shows that the data has not jumped around erratically, but has followed longer term trends in support for the major parties. (Our September data will be posted after the West Australian has published the results).
The August and September results are very different in character. So much so that the data has been examined very closely. We are confident that the results are an accurate reflection of voter sentiment. The survey method has been consistent. The sampling has been consistent. Moreover, the preferred Prime Minister data is exactly the same from August to September. If there had been a sample error to the effect that we had over sampled Labor voters in August and / or over sampled Coalition voters in September, the preferred PM data would surely have changed. The fact that the two surveys showed the preferred PM at exactly the same figure strongly supports the proposition that the survey has shown an important shift in voter sentiment. The results to the IR questions addressed in the September survey support this assessment. See the West Australian for details of the September results. ”
thats from patterson.
sounds like 50:50 maybe back to 52:48 libs way
Kina 231
‘And who knows maybe the Bush Administration is happy to create a terrorist attack. The USA govt has never been too shy to install the govts they want in other places so a littel shennanigans in Aust would be simple for them - if they had the will and reason’.
Yeeks, Kina! Don’t start fomenting stuff in my head. Was the Bush love in with Howard a prelude. I have to sleep!!
Glenn Milne jumps on the “Howard probably should go bandwagon.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22389300-7583,00.html
“Should Howard stay on - and if he’s the problem and not the Government itself, as many ministers argue - then the voters’ final verdict is likely to be even more savage than it is now.
Seen this way, Howard’s staying risks being perceived as a repudiation of the electorate.
He also risks the Liberal Party’s collective future. Younger ministers who entered politics for a long-term future around the cabinet table - Malcolm Turnbull, Andrew Robb, Christopher Pyne, Mal Brough, George Brandis and Julie Bishop - will be consigned to the long darkness of Opposition. A high price to pay for Howard to get a crack at what will surely be only one more year as Prime Minister.
So the sands are moving through the Liberal Party hourglass. But they cannot afford to move too slowly, a fact recognised by all those quietly increasing the pressure for leadership change.”
Well if the Westpoll does shows a Liberal lead it means the Labor lead in other states must be higher than 57/43. AND it is hard to imagine Labor doing any worse in WA than they did in 2001. Regardless of the poll it is a little hard to believe there isnt a swing of some sort against the Govt.
I received this warning from a friend: What do you think?
“The polls due out this week and next will probably determine when he calls the election. If there is no improvement he will go for it and try to break the cycle that way. I am sure Howard will pull a few things out of the hat during the campaign – how about something like dropping the top marginal tax rate down to the company rate of 30% - we’d all see it as a bribe but it would probably get enough people across the line and he just needs to hold the swing down to less than 17 seats (apparently the Libs are confident of holding all their seats in WA and winning one so the swing required is now 17 seats in the other states).”
Never trust a cornered rodent!
Tell your friend that Labor needs a gain of 16 seats to form majority government. And a gain 15 would almost certainly give Labor minority govt.
As for the Liberal Party’s confidence in WA - see the thread above this one.
Ah I see now. Your friend was including a WA Lib gain (presumably Cowan or Swan) and upping Labor’s non-WA gains to 17.
Still, pretty presumptive.
The early August Westpoll showed 54/46 with a margin of error 4% I believe. I wonder how good their sampling is?
For anyone who hasn’t noticed, see the new post on Westpoll.
Glen and fellow tories-there is a swelling wave of vengance coming to break upon you all. The denial of the polling numbers you are all exhibiting is so breathtaking…
SMH noted on Monday morning in their APEC wrap that it was unlikely that he would call the election this week if only because there were 9 federal safe labor seats in the country for which the Libs hadn’t yet picked candidates. Doesn’t that seem like a sorry excuse to delay an election because they are dragging their feet on which candidates to send walking the plank in 9 seats? The rest of them are walking the plank as it is.
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 8 » Show All