So how is it that Mr Rudd has held his advantage with those groups, Sgr Strocchi?

They can’t stand the L/NP which they see (correctly) as representing older, whiter, straighter, richer society.

Ambigulous says:

Does it all amount, ultimately, to basic good government which is appreciated by some 53% to 56% of electors?
(In other words the ‘honeymoon’ ends when signs of poor decision-making, or fractious Ministers, or scandal…. hit the news…..

(I correctly predicted the last election to within 0.5% of TPP vote, so I am confident of my model.)

So how is it that Mr Rudd has held his advantage with those groups, Sgr Strocchi?

They can’t stand the L/NP which they see (correctly) as representing older, whiter, straighter, richer society.

Ambigulous says:

Does it all amount, ultimately, to basic good government which is appreciated by some 53% to 56% of electors?
(In other words the ‘honeymoon’ ends when signs of poor decision-making, or fractious Ministers, or scandal…. hit the news…..

(I correctly predicted the last election to within 0.5% of TPP vote, so I am confident of my model.)

So how is it that Mr Rudd has held his advantage with those groups, Sgr Strocchi?

(I correctly predicted the last election to within 0.5% of TPP vote, so I am confident of my model.)

“Not rocking the boat”? “Steady as she goes.” Good policy? Consultation? Distinguishing himself from Mr Howard, decisively and repeatedly? Responding to the GFC with strong and well-directed stimulus?

Does it all amount, ultimately, to basic good government which is appreciated by some 53% to 56% of electors?

Is it as simple as that?

(In other words the ‘honeymoon’ ends when signs of poor decision-making, or fractious Ministers, or scandal…. hit the news…..

We’ve seen umpteen “honeymoon is over” stories, with a sub-theme that Liberal research (no doubt being spruiked around the press gallery as we speak) demonstrates “doubts” about Kevin Rudd.

I have always thought that the polls average 55-45 was an over-estimate of the ALP. I am going for a 53 (ALP) – 47 (L/NP) spread in 2010, which is what I predicted for the 2007 election.

It is possible (probable?) that the 53 (ALP) – 47 (L/NP) spread is the new equilibrium point for median voter preference in AUS’s two-party preferred electoral pendulum. This follows from the systematic pro-ALP bias amongst Baby Boomers, NESBs and single-mothers.

My interpretation of the polling data since 2006 is that underlying support for Rudd-ALP has remained pretty stable. Although the observed polling data jumps around a fair bit it tends, IMHO, to overstate the ALP’s vote. Since 1949 the ALP has never won a landslide (56-44 TPP) victory. They aren’t going to start now.

In the publicity of an opinion poll the “halo effect” will tend to help ALP/GREEN. In the privacy of the polling booth the average voters thoughts turn to how best to serve moi and screw tu. This helps the L/NP.

OTOH the Rudd-machine seems to be avoiding the mid-term slump that generally afflicts most governments. I put this down to the ALP’s structural electoral advantage in decisive demographics, geezer boomers, NESBs and unwedded mothers.

The median voters do not really love the ALP-Rudd, they just can’t stomach the thought of voting for the L/NP, akin to having an affair with the wall-flower. In that sense the “honeymoon” is long over since it never really began.

Eventually the voters will tire of the ALP, probably mid-way through the second term (~2011) when the ETS bills start to clock up. Thats when the electoral pendulum will start to recede from the Rudd zenith.

I have already predicted that he will win 2010 53-47, a slight improvement on his 2007 performance. No reason to change that prediction.

The commentariat (and blogitariat) have to have something to talk about every day, even if its noticing the noise rather than signal. And every journalist knows that two data points with the same sign represent a “trend”.

http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2009/4436/

All sorts of info there but despite the potential for negative spin:
-”while 46% (up 12%) of L-NP supporters disapprove of the legislation”
-”If we don’t act now it will be too late/already too late” has dropped from 69% to 66%
the key points this little black duck sees are that:
-the ratio of approve to disappprove [minus 'dunno's] is 5:3
- a plethora of possible causes for disapproval given to the disapproving minority gives an almost random scatter of reasons with, and this is the major point, only 6% citing “Don’t believe in global warming” as their reason.
Thats a tiny percentage of a minority.

I think we are about to see a trend reversal as the issue starts to regain the attention it deserves.

The Coalition won’t be able to keep them, though. Unless asylum seekers remain a prominent news story, the figures will drift back to Labor. The Coalition simply aren’t providing anything compelling at all for voters. And from what I can tell, most of the voters they’ve lost since the election would only be interested in returning if either Howard or Costello were leading the party anyway.

For the numbers to get dangerously close, I think three things need to happen:

1. Some kind of urgent refugee situation – a Tampa style thing.
2. Labor to handle it extraordinarily badly.
3. The Coalition to provide something unified and intelligent in response.

The first is possible. The second seems unlikely. The third I can’t actually imagine at all.