Adelaide’s Advertiser newspaper today carries a slightly curious poll of voting intention in Boothby, held for the Liberals by Andrew Southcott on a margin of 5.4 per cent. Conducted by phone from a sample of 649, it shows Southcott leading Labor candidate Nicole Cornes by an improbable 49 per cent to 32 per cent after distribution of the undecided. No two-party result is provided, but commenter Matthew Sykes has transcribed the paper’s large volume of generally unilluminating data from the poll throughout the previous comments thread. No doubt the Advertiser’s pollsters do their best, but my mind is drawn back to the final week of the state election campaign last March, when it ran a poll showing the Liberals neck-and-neck in Norwood and set to retain Hartley. Labor went on to win the seats with respective margins of 4.2 per cent and 4.6 per cent.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Advertiser Boothby poll
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
516 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 11 » Show All
for all the ignorati
1.women didnt have the vote till
1893 nz
1894 south aust.
2.so nicole is representing a fine tradition
all the alpha males should get a hairy dog up themselves and learn a
bit of HISTORY
3.to further enlighten the ignorati read
“My Story-Suffragette the diary of dollie baxter london 1909-1913″
It is an interesting poll in that it indicates quite a lot of voters literally changing sides. 9% of Libs deserting to Labor, 7% of Labor voters deserting to the Libs. Perhaps they are all just parking their votes?
As an ALP member I was a little dismayed at the initial Cornes press conference, but did note her apparent absence of guile.
The poll clearly suggests that her problem won’t be in picking up enough votes off the Libs, it will be holding onto the Labor constituency at the same time. Now that is something that Labor should be able to do something about.
If Nicole can steal 9% from the Libs (albeit only to lose similar Labor support) in Boothby, then I would anticipate that it must be very close in nearby Sturt.
I thought that monthly article explaining how he became the president of the Young Liberals was hilarious. Apparently he acheived it by persuading a Tasmanian Young Liberal who was previously a member of the Greens to vote for him, instead of the moderate candidate!
I agree with Ed the Pseph’s way of looking at this. She is intended to erode into the blue ribbon Liberal voters in the hills and Brighton. Having an ex-Lib may upset traditional Labor supporters but where else will their preferences go? It’s Rudd and Rann all over.
Adam Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
This is all a lot of tosh. Once the campaign starts everyone will focus on the national campaign and the party leaders, and in suburban seats local candidate factors won’t matter very much. If there is a big swing on across Adelaide, Boothby will go with the flow, whether the ALP candidate is good, bad or clinically dead.
Adam that might be correct in other seats but Boothby will vote for the candidate. Southcott will win
Mick Quinlivan Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Labor will poll very well in SA maybe a 10% plus swing
It wont be that much more like 4-5%
So Bill other than being a woman (I have to say it give me a break) WHY will the voters of Boothby vote against Ms Cornes? Now we are talking collectively so if you think they will vote against her because of clothing or because she has the right / wrong male owner then you can say so and we will never think you are sexist – just that you think they are sexist.
Does that make sense?
I am genuinely interested in some analysis at a higher level that ’she is a drip’. And for the record I was involved with a situation where I was asked if a candidate of a certain ethnic background had a lesser chance than a candidate not of a certain ethnic background – and my answer was yes. Kind of because I’m stupid I wanted to run the candidate …. but … I’m just trying to depersonalise the discussion. I get you all hate her and don’t want her elected I’d like to know why.
Jasmine I don’t hate her 1. i have never met her 2. never read anything she wrote 3. never heard her being interviewed 4. Hate is a bad word to use.
What i am hearing is that voters i know in the area are not impressed with either candidate so better to stick to the devil u know.
jasmine_Anadyr Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
I get you all hate her and don’t want her elected I’d like to know why.
Thats true i dont want to see her elected and not Southcott either. It has to be Green!
But and Adam will cringe at least Cornes lives in the electorate not moves in at the last minute.
But Bill, you’re tipping a Howard win too, against the odds.
What will be important in boothby for either candidate is the Green prefs currently at 9 % but i would expect it to be allot higher than that as Jodi is a great candidate. FF will not poll well here so Cornes could loose it due to the apparent FF/ALP right wing conservative deal. Now wouldn’t that be a pity
Gary Bruce Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
But Bill, you’re tipping a Howard win too, against the odds.
yes i am and i think the recent polls in WA would be of concern to the ALP like i wrote before the party is not as confident as the bloggers on here are
A couple of observations:
There were quite a number of blog contributors who, at the time, aired misgivings about Maxine McKew’s pre-selection. It seems like a stroke of genius now.
Re. Nicole Cornes, is there any other example of a candidate in a seat with a 5%+ margin drawing this level of criticism (both MSM and blogs) especially from people who are outside their electorate and frequently outside their State. That’s certainly the sense in which I agree with the indefatigable Jasmine.
In an ideal world, we have multiple accomplished, idealistic contenders for pre-selection, so that we can choose the one who is best qualified, which might mean ideologically-reliable, knowledgeable on policy, committed to representing the electorate etc.. However, if the seat is valued, it’s almost invariably the one who is best connected with the people who run the party who wins in the real-life game; unfortunate but true.
The cynic’s trick with pre-selection is surely to choose some-one who can induce the other side’s voters to switch. For the most part in safe to reasonably safe seats held by the opposing party, it scarcely matters – and it’s extremely difficult to find a sacrificial lamb to take on the task.
In the once in a blue moon year (for Labor 1969, 1983 and probably 2007; for non-Labor 1966, 1975, 1996) some sacrificial lambs get lucky, so it’s best to ensure that they don’t make too much of a hash of things when they are elected. Andrew Jones Adelaide 1966-69 is my favourite example of a warning to parties; but it’s not the duds who can be hidden in the parliamentary party who constitute a serious problem, but the loose cannon who can’t be controlled. I see very little evidence that Ms. Cornes is a threat in that sense, and I agree with those who believe that her success will depend on how the SA swing holds up. I’d be willing to wager that she will be within +/-1% of the state-wide swing.
And i believe that Sarah Hanson Young will win the last senate seat in SA due to the fact that left unions will not support the Religious right.
Bill, the recent poll in WA was for the state government. Are you saying people will just vote the way they do state as they do federally? All of the other parts of that poll, premiers satisfaction rating etc. were very much in carpenter’s favour.
Also the party is never going to be confident after what they have gone through in the past. That means little. The statistical data means more.
If the ALP is going to win it will be on Green prefs in the 2nd tier marginals and it seems that the ALP are willing to loose those seats and marry FF
I think that Labor should go on the front foot with supporting both Nicole’s natural and political strengths. Put some resources into positive tv exposure for her. That is IF they really are serious about Boothby.
This is one seat that the right pitch and money spent in the right way should buy in the next few weeks, particularly with this candidate. Why should she be forced to pretend to detailed knowledge of policy that she has absolutely no background in? Better to Get real. Better that she bats that one away straight out (as she did indeed try to do in that ‘infamous’ first interview) but spruik more of why she ’switched camps’ and what kind of Australia she’d like to see. And she should insist on that.
Despite the cringe factor of her answering questions that are out of her area, I haven’t seen anything to suggest that she wouldn’t be a good local member in the traditional sense. Reports suggest that she is personable and wins people over when she meets them. A touch even of ‘Simon the likeable’?
An ad with her and someone like Maxine McKew discussing why they are standing for Labor and how they would like Australia to become might be the way to go.
If the poll is right Nicole has been very poorly marketed so far, particularly to Labor people in Boothby.
Maybe a focus group told them that Boothby was unwinnable but putting Cornes there would help Handshin in Sturt and the other marginal candidates over the line?
Something doesn’t add up for mine.
Bill I’m feeling you have a ever so gentle leaning to the greens (nothing wrong with leanings at times some have thought they could see a slant in my completely unbiased and uneditted body of not-work here).
Agree with you regarding candidates from the seat, but Adam, the parties and the voters don’t agree with us Bill. I am also in the would rather lose than get into bed with FF camp, but again the parties and electorate seem to disagree with us.
And hate is a strong word and when I said all I meant all excluding those not wanting to be in that collective (so arguably two bad word choices but who is counting that is possum’s job) but you theory comes back to people not want to change from the Liberal Devil to the Labor Devil. You could be right but 9 months of polling says people are certainly thinking about changing devils.
Thanks for the answer and for not being too cruel about my word choices. And I soooo got away with the whole ‘male owner’ reference … ahhhh sweet.
Just endorsing ruawake (#49) pointing to the football connection with the GetUp! advert to be run during AFL Grand Final – see here.
Peter
I agree with your comments re Nicole,they must be worried about her for the level of criticism and attention she is getting.
Partly may be because maybe they feel she should be a liberal candidate, she has admitted voting liberal in the past, has run her own succesful small business, has completed tertiary education, her law degree, is a newspaper columnist, is good looking and intelligent, has a young family and is not a union official.
One reason the libs hated and still hate Gough so much is that they feel he betrayed his class by running for labor, could be some of the same here.
And thanks William for the school of psephology you have created here.
Those slagging off Cornes should be directing their criticism at the ALP decisionmakers who seem to have developed a fascination with celebrity candidates. I haven’t seen any evidence that celebrity candidates have any positive influence on the vote – or any history of them making any significant contribution to Parliament – at best, some have been capable. However, let’s assume Ms Cornes has good intentions at least.
Based on the relative accuracy of past Advertiser polls, Nicole would have to have everything going for her including margin of error in her favour and the vast majority of preferences directed her way. Her primary seems to be too low to edge past Southcott. She may however appeal to younger voters both male and female although the poll seems to discount this, particularly the female vote.
Please people, can we understand that the verb is ‘lose’, not loose. Loose is what your bowels are when you’ve got Delhi belly, lose is what you do when you haven’t won, or when you’ve ‘lost it’.
cheers,
Alan H
Winston
Typically the criticism at labor candidates will try and pick on any percieved weak spot.
Like Hefferman did with Gillard accusing her of being deliberately barren. Cornes has two kids, so they can’t use this against her.
Another favourite is having a union past, can’t use this on Cornes.
Or being out of touch with the community, Cornes is born and bred in Boothby, worked in aged care during her school years and later in radio and newspaper.
Or has no real understanding of the real world, Cornes ran a succesful small business and has completed a law degree.
All the libs have left is the personal attack, this is going to be a very dirty campaign.
I love Bill’s assertion that since the ALP are doing a preference deal with Family First that Greens voters will get their revenge by voting for the Coalition.
Sorry if I missed it but who conducted the Advertiser poll?
#
1 Dave S Says:
122 Arbie Jay Says:
Somebody has the wrong end of the stick, bimbo’s don’t complete law degrees.
Back to psephology
These stories about Grey had better be true, because it has 108 booths and these maps have taken me two days to make.
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/2007seats/grey.shtml
Note the very large 2004 swings to the Libs in the booths in Whyalla, Port Pirie, Port Augusta, Iron Knob and the Little Cornwall towns, all centres of mining and smelting. The provincial working class obviously didn’t like Latham at all. So there certainly is potential for a big swing back in these areas. But even in 2001, the Lib majority was 10.6%, so it will take more than bringing back the Latham defectors even to bring this seat within range.
Call the election please says “completed a law degree”.
That is just what we need another lawyer..
By the way folks Tony Jones had a reason to get out bed today… and at least tonight i don’t have to use the remote…
I was actually a Cornes sceptic, have met her and she completely dispelled all my preconceptions, and seems by all accounts very personable, and above all very ‘average’ (in the sense of being like everyone else). The ironic thing was that someone in this blog said they respect Chloe Fox, Kate Ellis and Mia Handshin and would vote for them because they have more in common with them and share their values. Ironically I think Cornes has more in common with most ‘average’ people than all these women, being a mum, life experience, small business etc. Take away the ‘footballers wife’ cringe factor and I think that ironically its her averageness that puts people off. People want someone ‘better’ than themselves to represent them, not ‘one of them’ and in this sense the three aforementioned candidates are more marketable.
One wonders exactly what kind of Labor candidate would meet with Marky’s approval. Che Guevara? Rosa Luxemberg? Louis Althusser? The Baader-Meinhoff Gang?
Adam (134) – no, Marky would still argue they’d sold out!
Charles
As I said when theycan’t go the candidate on their abilities they get personal, with Cornes it is trying to paint her as a blonde bimbo, same as Hefferman does with Gillard accusing her of being deliberately barren. Tony is right Cornes makes a good impression on those she meets and her opponent Soutcott is on the Work place committee, a fervant suporter of Work Choices and a denier, like Howard of any housing affordability crisis. The libs would not be getting personal with Cornes if they didn’t think Southcott was under threat.
Adam
I’d guess the Latham factor in Grey was probably about 3%, add this and the 5% who will swing because of Work Choices, 2% because of the drought, water crisis and climate change and the libs inability to cope with it and other crisises , 1% because of equine flu and another lack of response to this crisis they caused, and 2% for the housing affordability crisis that Howard denies and you can see why the libs are worried about Grey.
Yeah If I had a baseball bat I’d be giving a few whacks to those ‘Labor’ people deserting Nicole Cornes on my way past to do my duty at the polling booth. Figurately speaking of course.
The poll suggests she has taken 9% of Southcott’s previous voters. Are some ‘Labor’ people so appalled to be in the company of this fickle 9% that they’d rather the Coalition was returned? They should give her a medal!
A win for Howard will mean a mandate for nuclear power, denial of climate change, more cruel treatment of minorities and refugees, endorsement of further workchoices type stuff and further aggressive foreign policy misadventures as well as undoubted endorsement for himself and his values as PM.
Cornes is representative of a broad aspirational, but essentally working class who have not been particularly political previously. Seems a few of them do not want to mandate these things to Howard if asked and presented with a reasonable alternative. Good on them!
And we all know this is very tight when it comes to the seat count, despite the reportedly likely slashed margins in several safe Lib seats.
Get your act together ALP machine on this one, or you’ll waste a good opportunity. Every potential seat is precious and must be fought for.
Nicole Cornes is getting free publicity that you dream about. How many people know who was the Labor candidate that ran last time. Sure she might make a few verbal slip ups. But most reasonable people and this does not include the media, rusted on Liberal supporters or half the blogocracy will cut her some slack.
One thing is for sure, the locals will know her name come polling day and that is much of the battle when you are fighting an incumbent.
I wonder what negative story the MSM will run about Rudd and/or Labor tomorrow. It’s becoming a daily ritual.
Meanwhile Adam back in the real world chief executives earn millons each year whilst working people get the crumbs… will anything change under Labor.. perhaps we can find a few more public assets to flog off and let the rich buy the shares… Yep i can remember when Labor was last in power Commonwealth Bank what has this provided for working people… Telecommunications competition… Tariffs reductions, Qantas sale and a string of failed airlines later.. part-time and casual employment all begun under Labor… Putting people in detention centres wonder who started this policy…
Yep Adam i maybe left but what i will standing up for is working people and the poor not unlike you another of those New Labor people who are false conscious.
So Marky Marky, you’ll be voting for? Are you one of those Labor people who would rather see a conservative government than a “watered down conservative government”? Personally, the more watered down the better but still I’ll take the watered down version any day rather than vote this lot back in.
Marky will be voting for Alex Hawke, same as he did at the Young Liberals convention in Hobart.
Sounds like a cross between a Green and a Socialist alliance voter to me
Holy crap! Did others see all the campaign material the Liberals are delivering in Bennelong? That’s where all the money that was going to be spent on N.S.W. marginal seats is going.
I want a government who actually believes in things.
I will be voting Labor of course.. .but do you all of actually believe they will make this country a better place to live. Or does Rupert Murdoch tell you all how to think.
Amazing isn’t it we have a Labor Government in Victoria and people sit on trolleys in hospitals…
And by the way Hugo by not believing in what Labor once stood means you sold out not me.
Gary,
The Channel 9 Late News tried to make something of Rudd’s statement that no shadow minister is guaranteed the job in Government, if Labor wins. This was apparently in response to a question about whether Swan would be treasurer and a speculation that Julia might want Treasury.
It sounds like the egg-beater at work, and just an attempt to keep the hubris tale running – “measuring up the curtains”, “arguing over the speakership” etc. etc.
Cornes gave the Libs and the media plenty of ammunition with that first interview a few months ago. It’s not entirely fair but it’s life – politics is a game where first impressions count for a lot.
Her interview this morning sounded terrible as well, I thought.
I reckon she’ll get five points less than the overall SA swing. So she’ll only win if the overall swing is massive.
All the Labor heavyweights saying today what a great job she’s doing – bet that’s not what’s being said in private!
Paul @ 60,
I think most of those who are voting to get rid of Howard really are doing it for more than just literally getting rid of him, even if they frame it in those words. Most people who hate Howard, hate him because of what he represents, and the things that he has done or tried to do.
However, the only way to change government is to vote for Labor. (& i’m talking lower house here of course, since the government is not decided in the Senate). Should a Democrat be elected to the lower house and they had the deciding vote on who would form government, who would they pick? While they would probably support Labor, I’m not aware of any statement by the democrats on this, and even if there was, since Democrats don’t enforce the party line, even for their own policy (eg GST), there is no way to be sure who a vote for the democrats would be for.
Of course this is all academic, since the Dems don’t have a snowflakes chance in hell of winning a lower house seat (I’m doubtful they will even get a Senate spot), and thus if you vote for the Dems, what matters is who you preference.
Yep they should support her or find an equally unbelievable candidate to parachute in their at the last minute. My advice would be to opt for the former and go for broke.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 11 » Show All