 |
The votes I used are of course two party preferred.
|
|
I looked at opposition leaders'
satisfaction, not PMs'.
|
|
All two party preferred are my calculations from Newspoll
primary data. This, and other numerical considerations, are expanded
on here. If you're not in the mood for numbers you can safely skip it. (It's
a bit heavy going.)
|
|
I use Newspoll
because they have a great online archive and because they are the best known
pollster. However, they are currently, for some reason, the least generous of
all to Labor, and if you include ACNielsen and Morgan, Beazley’s average voting
intention numbers increase substantially. Nielsen, in the dying days of
the last two election campaigns, was closest of all to
actual two party preferred, and this week they had
54 to
46 to Labor.
|
| We don't know what satisfaction/approval
rating means. Whatever it is, its relationship with voting intentions may be
weak, non-existent or opposite to what is commonly assumed. (The data points
to the latter.) Voters/survey respondents are human
beings, which means things aren't always linear and 'rational'. The bottom
line is that the leader needs to attract votes (and - just as importantly -
not repel ones that may be floating their way), and it is possible that
respondents greatly admire the
very things that, come election day, actually send them
scurrying. For example, people might have liked John Hewson because "at least he has a plan
for the country", or Mark Latham because "he's tough, knows what
he stands for and isn't easily swayed" but at the ballot box these are
the things that repel them. Possibly also an underdog effect helps lowly
approved leaders.
|