Good poll news for John Howard:

Newspoll, published in The Australian newspaper today, found the coalition’s primary support rose 2 points last week to 44 per cent this week.

Meanwhile, Labor’s primary vote fell four points to 37 per cent.

ALP leader Kim Beazley’s approval rating is down to 34%, equal to this February low for George W. Bush. I guess that means Beazley should be impeached or something.

Posted by Tim B. on 08/14/2006 at 11:23 AM
  1. With interest rates up, fuel up, political infighting in the Libs, what on earth does that dud have to do to get his approval rating up???

    Apart from finding some policies….  and some balls and a backbone might help as well!!!!

    Posted by casanova on 2006 08 14 at 11:31 AM • permalink

  2. all part of kimbo’s cunning plan to lead the alp to victory in 2007

    ... stifled giggling…

    Posted by KK on 2006 08 14 at 11:39 AM • permalink

  3. I’m not Australian so my knowledge of Aussie politics is limited, but 44% approvak ratings after 10 years in office is phenomenal.

    Posted by Ross on 2006 08 14 at 03:12 PM • permalink

  4. It’s not 44% approval rate - it’s 44% of the population saying they’d vote for him.

    His approval rating is 47% and his “preferred prime minister” is 50%.

    So there’s 3% of people who say, “He’s shit, but Beazley’s even shitter.”

    Posted by Quentin George on 2006 08 14 at 05:09 PM • permalink

  5. That’s 44% of the population saying that they would give their first preference vote to JoHo.  Once the second and third preferences come in that puts him well over 50%. For our American friends, I should state that in Oz we have instant run-off elections.  So we have to mark our ballot papers with numbers against all the candidates name; with a pencil.  Can you imagine the Florida voters having to cope with that?

    Posted by Toryhere2 on 2006 08 14 at 06:13 PM • permalink

  6. Here’s Mr Howard’s web page.

    You can write to him what ever you want to.

    Dear Mr H,

    Not more Immigration?

    1.618 xx

    p.s. Love your walking video on CD.



    Posted by 1.618 on 2006 08 14 at 06:33 PM • permalink

  7. A pollster once told me that there is an error rate in polls of something like plus or minus 5 per cent that Australian media rarely acknowledge.

    This effectively means that stories saying that someone’s approval is up or down 2 or 3 per cent over the last one are a crock - you could get that difference by simply doing the poll again immediately…

    I understand that some media organisations overseas cover polls more honestly.

    This is the kind of issue Media Watch might cover if they ever get past the morning-TV-weather-presenters are bad journalists-Gate.

    Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 08 14 at 06:58 PM • permalink

  8. I heard this all the way up North here. I thought it good news but I don’t (yet) live under the regime.

    The only danger is that being in power for a really long time does allow for slackness to creep in.

    Apparently, Australians are obligated, by law, to vote. Does this affect results? Who, BTW, brought in this requirement? It was the left I suspect and look what it does for them.

    I hope someone will inform me here.

    [B]Death to suicide bombers!
    No, wait a minute.
    Life to suicide bombers!{\B]

    Posted by Wimpy Canadian on 2006 08 14 at 07:41 PM • permalink

  9. #8

    who did it? I think there was bipartisan support but it was back at the time of the First World War so perhaps we should just blame the kaisar and leave it at that.

    who does it favour? tricky question. Who do the apathetic voters tend to vote for? I’d say who ever happens to be in office at any given point in time…unless there is a tidal wave of hatred for the government then it would probably be the other way.

    Posted by Mike.A. on 2006 08 14 at 07:53 PM • permalink

  10. #8 Its compulsary to turn up to the voting booth and check your name off.  Once you have done that you can walk straight back out.  However since your there you might as well vote…I think its work well.  Without it you would have the same situation as the US where no one would vote.

    Posted by Anthony_ on 2006 08 14 at 08:07 PM • permalink

  11. It was an ALP state government that first introduced it but it spread quickly among governments of both sides of politics, each imagining it to be to their advantage (Labor to bring out the working class, conservatives to bring out the silent majority). Australian political history is typical of Western countries in peace time—long periods of conservative rule punctuated by brief `progressive’ governments—so I don’t think compulsory voting has made any difference to the results.

    Arguably, our system is cheaper, because parties don’t have to expend resources simply getting people to vote; but it fosters even greater alienation in safe seats, where voters experience next to no on-the-stump campaigning.

    The combination of compulsory voting and preferential voting is invidious, and manufactures consent, to coin a phrase. An honest ranking of the candidates in any particular constituency would often lead to the assessment that the ALP candidate was the second-most conservative and technocratically competent: why ask us to say so, or lie tactically to express our wishes? And why, in order to vote conservative, must we precisely rank the preferability of the Trot, the Nazi, the Monster Raving Loony and the Green, when to do so properly would be the kind of hermetic riddle that could take a lifetime to answer?

    The whole thing is an assault on liberty.

    Posted by Andrew R on 2006 08 14 at 08:31 PM • permalink

  12. 10#

    I don’t think no one would vote. In NZ where voting is voluntary about 70% on average vote. It wouldn’t be much different in Australia.

    Posted by Mike.A. on 2006 08 14 at 10:01 PM • permalink

  13. #11 here in sunny Qld we have optional first preference.  That way you don’t have to distribute your preferences if you don’t want to. 
    In an election where you have a whole heap of carpet bagging independents,‘just vote one’ tends to favour the more ‘progressive’ party, as opposed to those seen to be aligned with reactionary forces. Hence, the main beneficary of the rise of One Nation in Qld politics was the ALP.
    Personally, I prefer compulsory preferential voting.  At least you have chance to have a further say if your preferred candidate isn’t going to get up.  Never follow the suggested preferences of the candidates, though.

    Posted by entropy on 2006 08 14 at 10:30 PM • permalink

  14. Compulsory voting does get people using the grey matter a bit. Instead of worrying about who is going to win the footie, they can worry what will happen if that deadhead dumb lot get in.
    A little bit of thinking goes quite a ways.

    Posted by waussie on 2006 08 15 at 12:24 AM • permalink

  15. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.