Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Newspoll: ALP 53 - LNP 47

A good Newspoll for the Liberals - if by "good" you mean worse than the last election, and one which would see the ALP increase its margin.

Now obviously compared to recent results this is good. But they still have a long way to go. To see just how far, go over to the ABC website where you can use this wonderful "Election Calculator" devised by "Election Guru" Antony Green. It's a bit rough in that it estimates what would happen if the swing was uniform (which it never is), but you can break it down state by state if you want.

If this poll was replicated in 2010, the ALP would win 88 seats (a gain of 4), the LNP would win 59, and the three independents would keep their seats (which they always will). To see the struggle the Libs have, going by the calculator, the Libs need to get the ALP vote down to 50.3% before they take the lead.

So the Libs need to somehow get 3% off the ALP two party preferred. But if the ALP vote went the other way and increased by say only 1% to 54%, then the ALP would win 8 seats and have an overall victory of 92-55. That's a fine margin of error for Turnbull and Co. Everything would have to go right for them to even have a hope of winning.

Also of note is some excellent analysis done by "Aristotle" on the Oz Election forum. He compares the averages of the last four Newspolls with the averages of the first four done after Turnbull became leader:

Primary votes:
First four polls: ALP 42.8; LNP 38.3; GR 10.3; OTH 8.6
Last four polls: ALP 43.0; L-NP 38.3; GR 10.3; OTH 8.4

Two Party Preferred
First 4: ALP 54.8; LNP 45.2
Last 4: ALP 54.7; LNP 45.3

So basically it's gone back to where it was when Turnbull first came on the scene; no change. Business as usual folks, move on, nothing to see (yet).
Question Time today was good for seeing Julia Gillard have fun with Christopher Pyne (and The Australian). But the rest was rather dry.

It was also note worthy for the absence of any real questions by Turnbull to Rudd. I don't think Turnbull knows what to do at the moment. I think he is just hoping to get through the next week and a half without too much bother (most likely the debate on the Emissions Trading System will be put off), and then over the recess he will try and formulate a strategy (and possibly a rejig of the front bench - no need to worry as much about pleasing the hard right, now that Costello has gone).
In the last week of the 2007 election, in a moment of absurd desperation John Howard and Peter Costello appeared side by side on Today Tonight. It was excruciating TV. Howard said the two of them "were mates" and also:

I like Peter as a bloke. He's very bright. I mean, he's a seriously intelligent person. And he's also very funny. Peter's got a natural talent for wit and humour, which is much greater than mine. I mean, I'm lousy at telling jokes.

Yesterday when asked to respond to Costello's announcment that he was leaving politics, Howard said this of his mate:

"He was treasurer in a government which left Australia better able to weather the financial storms of recent times than virtually any other nation. That is something of which he and all other members of that government should be immensely proud."

And that was it.

Never has praise been fainter. You'd hate to see what Howard has to say of his enemies.

No comments: