The Age has published the third of ACNielsen’s online polls, which are taken from a representative sample of around 1400 volunteer market research subjects. It shows Labor leading 56-44 on two-party preferred, the same result as the previous such survey a fortnight ago. However, Labor’s primary vote is down two points to 45 per cent, with the Coalition also down a point to 40 per cent. John Howard has picked up three points on the preferred leader question directly at the expense of Kevin Rudd, whose lead is now 50 per cent to 42 per cent.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
ACNielsen online poll: 56-44
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
574 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 12 » Show All
“98
ShowsOn Says:
November 10th, 2007 at 2:34 am
Let me guess – more road funding for Seasame Street?”
No, he wants the role of Statler or Waldorf, whichever dies first.
ShowsOn i like your petition idea very much but i just don’t think it will work the ABC are stubborn and will have Cameron and Kroger on then ugggh soooo boring!
Do you reckon rhyming would be sufficient grounds for Prime Minister Rudd to hold the next election in 2011, so he can use Kevin11?
Lemme think, the writs must be returned by 100 days after 17th October, which is 25th January (by my count) and then Parliament must meet within 30 days after that, being 24th February. So assuming that Kevin07 doesn’t try and call Parliament in the month between the election and Christmas, that would allow him to call an election in January of February 2011 to be held in March, thus restoring the pattern of March elections (1983, 1990, 1993, 1996), and also bringing the election of the Parliament much closer to Senate terms (with Senators taking office only three months later instead of 8 months later).
Here’s another thought: if we did institute fixed federal terms (either three or four years) wouldn’t we have to consider when states have their fixed terms? And if you wanted to avoid having a federal election fall at the same time as a state (as will happen in late 2010-early 2011 when we will have elections federally and in the two biggest states, meaning that about 57% of the Australian electorate would have both state and federal votes within a six-month period) you would need to extend federal terms to four years.
We currently have four year terms in all states and territories except Queensland and three states have fixed terms. This is broadly when in the four year cycle each one falls, starting next year
-ACT – October 2008
-WA – February 2009 (not fixed, but nearly always in Feb)
-NT – Middle of 2009 (not fixed, but always in June-August since 1994)
-Tas – Late 2009/Early 2010
-SA – February 2010
-VIC – November 2010
-NSW – March 2011
So what it shows is that only Tas, NT, Qld and Federal haven’t “claimed” a certain point on the four year cycle, WA isn’t technically fixed but apart from a December election in 1996 every election has been in February or March for a long long time. NT also
It would be an interesting exercise to lay out a four year plan for fixed four year terms that would spread everyone out.
-Federal – March Year 1 (being a leap year)
-ACT – October Year 1
-WA – February Year 2
-NT – August Year 2
-Tas – November Year 2
-SA – March Year 3
-Vic – November Year 3
-NSW – March Year 4
-Qld – September Year 4 (the hardest one to place)
Sorry, don’t know why I thought about this, I think cause someone referred to “Kevin11″, anyway, interesting idea.
I thought you said you were an Atheist Glen, bugger.
I am mad cow. I am not a christian conservative and if i were a yank id be pissed having to vote for them but hey.
Shows on I’d love to watch Keating and Hewson but I think it would just end up as a Howard loathing session.
I’m looking forward to seeing Kroger on election night saying: “That’s a terrible loss, X was such a good local member and the people of [name of electorate] will be poorer as a result.”
I reckon he’ll say 35 times.
Glen,
Well then you should have no problem with there being no difference practical or symbolic with ‘gay marriage’.
As a matter of history we had marriage enshrined in law, thus making us something less than a secular state. So therefore the logic is we should either cut the ties, and not enshrine marriage in law, and leave it to the churches as to what they want to call it, or else make it non discriminatory.
Incidentally, one of the more aggravating things Howard did is not only not give gay people law reform, he actually sent us backward by taking away the recognition of gay ‘unions’ in immigration.
So you can ‘marry’ or form a ‘union’ with another gay person in various countries, but Howard wants to make it harder for your partner to have residency here. What an asshole.
Dr Phelps, finally
Ben @103, that often makes me wonder. is it possible to play that game making every election a little longer than 3 years, until, the election gets out of synch with the senate? The election happening after the senators are supposed to sit. Im pretty sure they thought of that.
Well mad cow, look i know to each his own but i still like the idea of marriage being set aside for hetrose*ual couples, that’s just me its not really based on any religious belief its just my take on it. I am not fussed about civil unions really whatsover and i think that’s something that could be explored.
Interesting that AWA article by Norrington titled “red Tape” in the GG has been recast as “Meltdown as half AWAs fail test” on the News site.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22734203-5012863,00.html
I think marriage should be privatised. The only reason people require a marriage certificate from the government is because the state had to assume this role to avoid religious wars.
We no longer have wars over whether Catholics or Protestants are the true Christians, hence we no longer need the state to tell consenting adults when they are or aren’t married.
Do adults require a license from the government to reproduce? Why should they require a license to say they are married?
We spent the late 1970s and most of the 1980s getting the government out of the economic sphere of society, it is time the government got out of many aspects of the social sphere.
Oh what can I do but laugh…
I totally agree those two are a complete bore. I just think Keating V Hewson would be a great way to round out the campaign.
Just put your name on the petition! If I can get 1000 by next Friday I’ll email the ABC the link and call them. That would give them 1 week to try and arrange it.
Latham vs Abbot
I swear if the government loses, Abbott will quit parliament and write reactionary articles every month for Quadrant, while holding down a post at the Centre for Independent Studies, as he tries to revive the D.L.P.’s senate prospects.
I met Abbot once. Absolutely conceited with no clue about real people. At the time we were running 11 job seekers per job vacancy. His response ‘oh well, if you keep trying you’ll get one’. He didn’t actually stop to see the lottery paradox in that. If you *do* win that job, then *someone else* will be unlucky. Also gave me the impression that he had no idea that at the bottom of the ‘value’ ladder are people who aren’t to brainy, who are partially handicapped, etc. And all he could do was mumble ‘welfare to work’. Being thrown out of an airlock into deep space, is too good for him.
That 56/44 take on it is proving very persistent.
I wonder if the Libs have taken any soundings in Mayo?
Ed.. you mean 56/44 nationally, or?
56/44 would see Warringah probably too close to call on the night. That is one hell of a swing. Another seat that is heading for marginal status.
I just watched Peter van Onselon (spelling, sorry) on Lateline – I’ve always respected his opinion (partly because he’s hot – PollBludger eyes, come on admit it who doesn’t
) but I think he’s flying blind on this one. Laura Tingle made heaps more sense.
Sorry mad cow. I meant that if it is 56/44 nationally then that is more or less a 9 point swing. Therefore Mayo (13.6) will probably get a swing well over 9 percent while the more marginals will mostly swing less than that in South Australia. I believe that the Mayo electorate came to within 2 percent of preferencing Downer out, not that long ago. If the ‘missing’ swing in SA is not in Mayo, then it definitely must still be there in Grey.
on primary votes:
ALP 45%, down from 47%
Coalition 40%, down from 41%
a worried sign on ALP primary votes?
The last poll of all the pollsters showed a “Liberal Party” drop:
Morgan phone -2
Morgan F2F -5
AC Nielsen -1
Galaxy -2
Newspoll -1
Coincidence or telling us something?
http://media01.couriermail.com.au/multimedia/2007/11/071104-galaxy/071101galaxypoll.pdf
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/files/newspoll-6nov.pdf
Frank – maybe just a sampling variation – picked up more Greens than ALP. Or could indicated a movement to the Greens of ALP primary – but most of it comes back again. As long is it doesn’t jump anywhere eles.
Their next poll will answer the question.
thanks kina @ 125
I heartily hope so
and overall 56/44 is very good indeed
I keep telling people – don’t start celebrating yet!
1. Howard has come from behind before.
2. The MSM is literally in his pocket – and that counts for a lot. When you see constant anti-Labor headlines everywhere, it will influence some people.
3. Labor is still not on the ball. If the ALP wins this election, it will be in spite of themselves.
4. There are still two weeks for another MV Tampa to sail over the horizon – and I’ll bet that Howard has tried to arrange just that, in order to save his miserable political carcass. Given that the AFP is in his pocket also (ref: Haneef case and memos), that shouldn’t be too hard to arrange.
5. The boundaries are set at present such that Labor needs more than an even TPP to win – it needs 52%, just to get a hung parliament. The Libs can survive if they pick up just a few percent. See Antony Green’s Calculator.
While this poll is excellent news for Rudd and the ALP, if they don’t get off their backsides, my prediction of a 78-80 seat victory for the Coalition will unfortunately come true. Hell, JWH will be ecstatic at 76 or even 75 seats.
frank @123, that can only be labor voters feeling safe and flirting with the greens
Mathew, what *are* you smoking..
1. In the last 5 election campaigns Howard made significant ground in only one.
2. That might be true, but if it were going to have an effect, you’d see it by now. We’ve seen maybe, just maybe a percent coinciding with the election being called, and nothing statistically significant since.
3. The ALP could do better, but it could do a lot worse, and generally speaking the Libs are fumbling more. Despite the ‘better economic managers’ bit, the big unspoken (and unpolled for) issue is not ‘who is doing a better job’ but ‘who do you trust’. That’s something that once you’ve lost you cannot win in a campaign.
4. If that happens, don’t you think the voters might be a tiny bit more cynical this time?
5. I don’t know the exact figures but the 52% is very optimistic. The boundaries probably account for around 50.5%. If you actually fiddle with Antony’s calculator, you’ll find the parties even (seat wise) on 51%.
Unless something catastrophic is wrong with the pollsters’ methods, the odds of the Liberals winning are under 5%. I’ll stick with my prediction of 83 for Labor but frankly I think that’s a little pessimistic. It assumes that the final result is around 53.5.
i watched van odious and tinkle after my shift – rather un-inspiring – van the man was (it seemed) rather less ljh hater than i would have hoped – tinkle MAY have seen the light – neither suspected that the Latham innuendo may actually have been a placatatory message – viz – “a vote 4 rudd is actually a vote 4 ljh” – i read too much machiacelli earlier
machiavelli was a cool cat too and only a typo away
Well, had to drag myself away last night so I missed the ACN online & that lovely little AWA story. Quelle hoot!
Clearly, Peak Lib has passed. May it rest in peace.
And Mathew C, I wouldn’t be so sure about the loyalties of the AFP. I suspect they, like the defence force, have had enough of being used by Howard and co to prop up their crap political agenda.
Anyway, don’t worry about stuff you can’t control. The reality is Rudd is running a good campaign, Howard’s is a disaster par excellence. Ms Tingle had it nailed. Young Van O, (the boy AsPro) on Lateline was trying to provide a debate, i think. I doubt very much he believes that nonsense he was spouting. If he does, he needs a new career.
I’m hanging out for the broadening now. And yes, that is hubris.
And this poll was taken before sorry-gate, scumbag-gate, AWA-gate and Kroger too gutless to do Lateline-gate …
I also think Laura Tingle is cute,
I’d really like to try and make her smile a bit more, maybe by tickling her toes or…
Oh sorry, wrong blog
The drop in the ALP primary is probably going to the Grns ,the libs to the nutters on the right, this is the election now developing into second phase, people are comfortable with the ALP and are making further statements with more complex voting intentions, This is a particularily strong result for the Senate where the Tories now look gone. There was no narrowing but there could a slight move either way in the next two weeks,.
Having said that, how any objective journo could call the last week for Howard is bizzare, what their bias is doing is still giving people the impression that Howard can still vote. This is then making the swingers think, Oh F*** this I’m not taking the chance, I’d rather a total massacre rather than trying to get a close one.
Its to early for any mantion of toes, your doing bad things to my head. I did think however that Laura Tingle(where the bloody hell are you? Smart and cute) was really very good on lateline. Its fantastic watching the tories losing it. They are the worst losers, they are selfserving, selfish, self centered, cheating lying Ummmm, sorry got a bit carried away, anyway they are BORN to rule, when will the pessants stop this nonsense that people who are not Members of the Club can run the place. Its just not fair, Daddy and Mummy always told me that the Lord is in the Manor and all is well in the world. Sorry clearly the toes image has had a bad reaction
Could we please dispose once and for all the idea that that the coalition has a built in advantage so Labor must get a lot more than 50 p.c to win?
That mistaken notion comes from the so called pendulum which shows that the uniform swing required for Labor to win puts its vote at about 51.5 p.c.
But the swing will not be uniform. They never are. Labor could win the election with less than 50 p.c. as it did in 1990. So of course could the coailition.
But these possibilities exist in practice only if the election is close. If one side or other gets more than 52 p.c. of the vote they will win for sure. No amount of “wasted” swings in safe seats can change the overall outcome when there is a significant (4 p.c +) difference in the 2PP vote.
And with 2 weeks to go Labor is not 4 p.c. in front. It is 10 p.c. in front. Even an almighty stuff up which halves Labor’s lead will see them win very easily. Even an earth shattering event which cuts their lead by 80 p.c. should still see them win.
Ron Brown Says:
Spiros, I think there is a teensy bit of built in bias thanks to the fact that Labor tend to do well in highly populated areas and thus we end up with seats like Newcastle that tend to tie up a lot of labor vote.
If I’m wrong, bite me
Grayndler might have been a better example. Oh well.
It’s a bit odd but even though the campaigns haven’t been launched yet, my wife and I have just cast our votes.
We are registered postal voters and have just placed our votes in the envelopes ready for posting shortly. The rest of the campaign is a complete waste of time and money for us….. and I wonder how many others.
For your interest we have done Greens 1, ALP 2, ….. Libs 7 and FF 8 in the Reps and for the first time in recent history voted above the line in the Senate – 1 for Greens.
Why ther Greens. So they’ll get the money and the ALP will get the vote. Hint to Kevin – move left a little.
Seriously though, wouldn’t it be good to get a smile, you could spend a whole day trying
Actually, on topic for a second, is anyone worried that both Morgan and this AC online polls now have ALP primary down to 44/45?
AC Neilson trend from the Online poll shows ALP primary dropping 2 points every two weeks starting with 18-20 September (50), 23-25 October (47) and now this one at (45).
Two more weeks of this and it will be at 43, which is stiking dis
mad cow @ 140
there are Labor seats like that. But there are Liberal and National seats like that too (Mitchell, Maranoa etc). It all cancels out.
Fairy nuff
Grumblebum
Which electorate?
Mr squiggle @143. The Liberal primary vote alsi dropped. 43 p.c. primary for Labor would still be 6 p.c. more than in 2004.
What we may be seeing, as per Grumblebum @142, is left Labor voters, confident that it is now in the bag, going Greens 1 Labor 2.
This may sound stupid but could someone explain to me MSM. I know GG is Government Gazzette. The previous blogs 127 talk about MSM & the bias for Howard.
MainStream Media
Spiros, I agree with you, but its the next step in the conclusion that is really interesting to me
If a recent ALP primary of around 50 was boosted by say 4-5% from the Green vote, then surely the Green preferences would not have split 80-20 as they did in 2004?
maybe closer to 60/40 like the other minors?
Morning ‘Bludgers.
Day #5 nicotine-free,
Day #1 of quitting bragging about it,
Thanks for all the cheerios, but from now on it’s strictly politics for this particular ‘Bludger.
I love youse all.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 12 » Show All