|
| |
Published in Crikey, May 30 2007
Peter
Brent, of Mumble
Politics, writes:
Last
Friday, on Lateline, party heavyweights Rod Cameron (Labor) and Michael
Kroger (Liberal) agreed on one thing: that Labor’s huge opinion poll leads are
not believable, and it’s really only "about 54 to 46".
You can
see what they were getting at. Sort of. But if polls show Labor ahead by 10 to
20 points, then that’s what they show. There’s little point putting another
number on it.
Current consensus has it that Rudd’s lead is "soft", and
"soft" support can be swayed back to the Government. True. But all
opinion poll positions are "soft". There might be “soft” votes on
the other side as well. What people are really saying is, again, that they
don’t believe the numbers.
Should we believe them? Newspoll’s 60-40 yesterday seemed out of this world;
is there any historical precedent at the ballot box? Yes, the biggest results in
Australian federal history were about 61 to 39 (against Labor) in 1931, and 59
to 41 (to Labor) in 1943. (Adam
Carr's estimates.) The first saw a change of government in the Great
Depression, the second, in World War II, was won by the incumbent.
But in sunny, plasma-telly Australia in 2007, it’s difficult to believe a
government could get such a thumping. On the other hand, there’s a first time
for everything.
Everyone also agrees Wayne Goss’s famous 1995 "baseball bats"
analogy doesn’t apply today, because people don’t loathe John Howard as they
did Paul Keating. Maybe not. But if there’s a big election result this year,
we’ll decide they did after all. (And the 1996 baseball bats were really only
a Queensland thing; Victoria for example gave the Keating government a small
two-party-preferred majority.)
Yes, the poll numbers will almost certainly narrow substantially between now and
the election. The economy in general, and IR and unions in particular, will be
tricky terrain for Rudd, particularly during the campaign.
But there’s a chance the polls won’t change much and we find ourselves
delivering the most one-sided result in decades.
As a deep, thoughtful and recent US defence secretary once noted: Stuff
happens.
And another thing: Some folks have wondered: why so many Newspolls over the last
few weeks? There were two extra ones last week, on top of the regular
fortnightly ones. I asked The Australian’s editor-in-chief Chris
Mitchell, and his answer won’t set your pulse racing: the paper asked Newspoll
for extra questions on IR and who voters think will win the election, and the
pollster suggested running extra polls rather than tacking the questions onto
the end of the next regular one. Mitchell agreed. | |
|