Morgan phone poll: 59-41

Possibly presaging a future pattern of early-week phone polls to tie us over until the Friday face-to-face, Roy Morgan brings us a phone survey of 611 respondents showing Labor leading the Coalition 59-41 on two-party preferred, and by 50 per cent to 36 per cent on the primary vote. Morgan alternated between phone surveys and larger-sample face-to-face polls until the end of August, after which it moved exclusively to face-to-face.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

495 comments on “Morgan phone poll: 59-41”

Comments Page 9 of 10
1 … 8 9 10

  1. Adam.
    I would love to bite… so i will.
    let me just say that your obvious mysogyny ( atheist/feminist/ socialist/ gay… I’m not gay!)
    misinterpretation is very unfair. Besides you forgot Single mother.

  2. “Christian inspired terrorism”. I take it you are refering to the car bombs in Baghdad placed by militant Methodists, the planes flown into skyscrapers by the Salvation Army, and the nightclubs in Bali blown up the Little Sisters of the Poor? This must be stopped at once.

  8. More bad news for Howard (the poll -wasn’t that the thread?) but more bad news for us, too. I wish one of the pollsters would fake their results to make it look like there was at least a little bit of hope for Howard, so he would get on and call this election. Surely there are pretty major consequences to the economy and governance from this delay?

  9. Re the broken links at my website. Elections between 1934 and 1961 are currently offline because I am reformatting all my Australian pages. I have neglected this task while travelling and more recently while building my 2007 election website, but I am doing them now, at about one election per day, so they should all be available again soon.

  13. Voterboy at 386, that was very well picked up.

    He’s channeling his inner Crosby Textor there, he’s been doing it a lot lately.

    Blech – there’s some things that should be left pure … dead soldiers being one of them.

  14. {If this were a football game, they’d be given a red card by now…}

    I’m quite happy to wait till election night to see Howard get his.

  15. Jen, #395

    No problem at all funding genuine problems. In fact there should probably be more of it.
    I Just don’t like the attitude of such people as Stephen Schneider.Professor, Dept. of Biological Sciences Stanford University and NationalCenter for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Boulder, Colorado.

    “We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest”.
    – Stephen Schneider (quoted in Our Fragile Earth by Jonathan Schell)

    Not, IMHO, the sort of attitude to be expected of a top scientist!

  17. Adam,
    I don’t need a thicker skin – I just need how to do the cutie smiley faces so I could do a winking one and you would know I was having a bit of fun. Not to mention my incompetence at doing the quoting thing which I still haven’t got , despite all the assistance offered.
    Which just probably reinforces your view that I shouldn’t enter politics. Mind you – set me up in a debate with Sophie M. and I’m formidable.

  19. Can anyone here from the “Left-leaning gallery” explain to me why in the “just-add-water” policy manual the following are mandated:

    1. You must be pro-abortion
    2. You must support euthanasia
    3. You must decry the death penalty for convicted criminals

    There may, of course, be a perceived rational difference for the apparent incongruence of items 1 & 2 with 3, but I’d like to know what it is.

    If politically left-leaning persons are so against the death of those who might potentially be innocent or so against the taking of another person’s life, why do they support the decision to kill a human on the basis of being “a health issue” or “life inconvenience”, who is, without any shadow of doubt innocent, but baulk at those calling for convicted criminals to be killed.

    For the record, I neither support capital punishment, nor abortion, nor euthanasia (voluntary or otherwise… feel the pain and depression of cancer first, then tell me you would be in your “right mind” if offer a suicide pack!)

    Oh, and before a truckload of pro-lifers reel out the old “rape baby” tripe, save your electricity with an estimate of 87 babies per year out of over 80,000 babies aborted. Has never been a resounding case for this amount of death.

    I just can’t understand the incongruity of this grab-bag of ideals.

  23. Captain Gerrymander, the 3 issues you raise are all different, and I’d suggest that you won’t find identical views amongst all the ‘left-leaning gallery’. There are Christian lefties, for instance, who strongly oppose Workchoices and the Iraq War, but are not too keen on abortion/euthanasia.
    The first two issues you raise touch on issues of self-determination.
    The death penalty has many standard arguments against it, not all of which are ‘leftist’. Many people would feel uncomfortable with giving the state the right to execute people. Also, most Western countries do not engage in capital punishment. Even in the US, only certain states persist in the practice.

  25. William,
    I have to say that earlier when I said that we shouold not be surprised that the death penalty was brought up I was really tempted to say
    “next it will be euthenasia and abortion”.
    But I though it would be just a cheap shot, and that I should not sink so low.

  26. William you asked for this when you first allowed your blog to broaden out from purely psephological matters. I did warn you about this. I know I am a prime offender but you set the rules.

  27. William, I understand your frustration and I don’t believe I have ever irritated you before.

    Certainly we would have more to talk about if we were in a real election but come on, there is some serious cognitive dissonance that happens on both sides of politics at times, you have diehards here.

    Let the explain themselves. These issues are at the core of both sides and don’t tell me they won’t crop up in the election!

    Can anyone justify the incongruity of these beliefs?

  30. Possum @ 413,

    {Voterboy at 386, that was very well picked up.}

    I saw a replay of that statement by Howard and had similar feelings about it as Voterboy and yourself.

    The man is on a continual election campaign 24/7, 365 days per year.

    It’s all he knows and he is so stuck on “the end justifies the means” that he has totally lost any semblance of true compassion or empathy for individuals or for working towards a caring society.

    The community he has led us to at this point in of selfish individualism which goes against the very reason why societies such as ours have been so successful and others failed.

  31. Captain G at 419,

    It’s pretty simple really – you just have to look at it as a form of centrism.

    Kill em from both ends. 🙂

    That’s why the death penalty is a no go, killing the middle aged doesnt fit the histogram.

  33. Hi Possum
    – who’s Sophie Monk?

    I meant Mirrabella.
    (wish i could do one of those smiley face things – is there one where they look slightly nauseated?)

  34. [1. You must be pro-abortion
    2. You must support euthanasia
    3. You must decry the death penalty for convicted criminals]

    Are people ACTUALLY pro abortion? I don’t think people argue that abortion is an inherently good thing, just that it should be a safe and legal option available to women in difficult circumstances.

    Incidently, I think abortion is one issue where people on different sides have reached a moral compromise of sorts. I think most people agree abortion should be avoided if possible, and increasingly that late term abortions should be restricted. However someone who doesn’t believe a fetus is a life won’t be convinced it is, and vice versa. Hence we have reached a compromise of sorts to allow it, but within limited situations.

    Regarding euthanasia. It already happens in hospitals every day. Patients refuse treatment (a family member of mine did this), Drs prescribe high levels of pain killers (e.g. morphine) to people who are dying. What we simply don’t have is it codified in legislation. Perhaps this is the way it should remain, we know it happens, but it is left to patients, families and Drs to decide. There isn’t lines of legislation in the way legislated by a pariament saying precisely what is right and wrong.

    Regarding the death penalty. I think there are moral grounds to oppose it. I don’t think governments should sanction killing in any circumstance bar open war, and that should be avoided at all costs, but is sometimes necessary. I don’t think there is any evidence the death penalty reduces crime. So what does it actually achieve? Revenge? If so, doesn’t that just diminish the value of life? I don’t think convicted criminals have less natural rights than regular citizens, because that would imply human rights aren’t universal, which I think is a dangerous thing to propose.

  35. As per my ruling of #421, the first half of this comment, which consisted of HR’s second response to CG, has been deleted – PB

    On the other hand, the issue of race-baiting appears to be ongoing, given last weeks’ announcements on Africans. The longstanding culture war issues continue to loom large, given the recent Government attack on those academics who had the temerity to criticise Workchoices. There have been some recent salvos fired by Paul Kelly, who’s not usually though foremost in these disputes, not to mention Imre’s garrulous effort in the GG today.

  36. Scorpio, Howard has always been like that.The fact that he managed to hide the fact that he is and always was a purely destructive political animal behind a PR facade of the “conviction politician” and slippery notions of the national interest, is a testament either to the ignorance of the public or the power of the issue management of a close circle of people that have been around him since 1996.

  37. HP

    I appreciate your efforts but this amounts to little more than generalisation.

    It is a core dissonance. The premise is the right of one individual to take away the life of another or influence them unfairly to take their own.

    You can’t have your cake and eat it.

    Bleat and roll eyes all you like folks but this actually does not constitute commentary. There is little coherence in these views and I find it hard that people can be so vocal about both at the same time.

    William is correct, there is much vilification that goes on here. Even bigotry. The “safest” potshots seem to be at Christians for some reason, who are often called “loopy”, “fanatical”, “extreme” and “irrational”.

    Well, firstly, I have never understood why I’d “need” to be Christian to be against abortion, nor do I consider holding these contrary views as “rational” for a Left-leaning person. One might even consider them “loopy”. Sanctity for all life seems pretty robust to me as a world view. Isn’t it?

  38. [That’s why the death penalty is a no go, killing the middle aged doesnt fit the histogram.]

    Trust Possum to take the statistical approach. 😛

  39. Possum, in the light of a fairly heavy discussion, I found that very humorous, well done! 🙂

    BTW Love your work mate, keep it up!

  43. Captain Gerrymander i am pro abortion and for enthusasia because i believe it to be about a persons’ right to do want they wish and not someone elses…
    And on the death penalty i am against it again for the same reason and because of the possiblity of “mistakes” being made.. ie Ronald Ryan.. nonetheless their are people around who in a kind of way for their heinous crimes committed possibly do deserve it for the lack of conscience shown…
    Abortion and Enthusasia are separate issues from the death penalty although i can see the problem you have raised that being death…
    Nonetheless i do believe it is about an individuals right to choose… And on the death penalty do people have the right to execute another….

  44. Captain G I’m sure you know perfectly well those who support a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy do not accept your premise that an embryo is a human life in any meaningful sense. You may dispute this view but please don’t pretend you’re unaware of it.

  47. My apologies William

    I simply missed the post, unintentional and will declare my input on said issue closed.

    Thanks for your grace!

    Nice interesting discussion folks, in the absence of much else politically satisfying to chew on.

    Well done to William, Possum and Bryan for attempting to give us something to go on anyway!!

    Adieu all! 🙂

  48. [I don’t see any reason to think that abortion, euthanasia or the death penalty will be issues at this year’s Federal election. ]

    Yeah, but it makes you wonder. What’s going to happen in 10 years when people like Alex Hawke are front benchers?

    [I’m not so sure they’d split down party lines. ]

    Yeah, for example Peter Garret is anti-abortion. But I’m pretty sure he realises that is a personal opinion that he wouldn’t force onto others via legislation.

    [There have been some recent salvos fired by Paul Kelly]

    I don’t understand Kelly’s point. Apparently Howardism is now the consensus in Australian politics. But if so, why does it seem Howard is about to be kicked out?

    [Even bigotry. The “safest” potshots seem to be at Christians for some reason, ]

    I try to criticise all religions equally, but apparently to be politically correct, I need to criticise some more than others.

    [Sanctity for all life seems pretty robust to me as a world view. Isn’t it?]

    Sure, but the question is how do you define when life starts? It seems to me that you can never get either side to change their opinion on that point. So the best that can happen is there be a compromise so that abortion is legal, but an option of last resort, i.e. sex education is just as important. The problem in the U.S. is some who oppose abortion, also oppose sex education.

  49. Captain Gerrymander suggests that defining left politics:

    1. You must be pro-abortion
    2. You must support euthanasia
    3. You must decry the death penalty for convicted criminals

    Lets just flip this:

    To be right wing:

    1. You must oppose most if not all possible abortions.
    2. You must oppose euthanasia.
    3. You must support the death penalty.
    And lets add a fourth
    4. You must support government sponsored conflict with associated collateral damage.

  50. William, there seems to be a concerted effort being made by posters on your site to get each separate subject thread up to at least 500 posts.

    Are you trying to set some sort of blogging record. The numbers have certainly increased in recent times.

    Possibly it is the increasing frequency of polls or just frustration that the election is dragging out to such an extent that people are getting increasingly frustrated at the wait.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 9 of 10
1 … 8 9 10