At The Drum, Andrew Catsaras has crunched the polling numbers, noting that “since July, the trend has been with the ALP”, and that:
the ALP can win the next election – and, yes, with Julia Gillard as leader.
… Go read the whole thing, as they say.
Catsaras’ analysis is spot on, but I’d also add that I think there’s been a turnaround in public sentiment towards the Prime Minister, which is showing in the polls on preferred PM and in her widening lead over Tony Abbott. Much of that may result from a sense that the onslaught of negativity and criticism directed at her, and its intensely personal and misogynistic expression, is just disproportionate and fundamentally unfair.
It’s the widening…
It is!
Interesting to see the press determined *not* to get the story.
People are starting to realize that things are happening under Gillard and her negotiating/managing skills are a key part of this success.
The polls are also saying that both Rudd and Turnbull are more attractive to voters overall than either Gillard or Abbott. It suggests that what the electorate really wants is some radical leadership rather the same old thing.
Up to now Gillard has concentrated on getting jobs completed that she inherited from Rudd. What we need from her now is something to convince us that she offers something original to lead Australia through some difficult times. It is particularly important that she delivers some ideas for delivering to the Labor core constituencies instead of trying to reach a compromise with those who are never going to vote for her.
I’ve been saying this for a while and I’m no genius. Abbott had his own timetable that he’d be in the Lodge by Christmas 2011, and he isn’t. I’m sure he has no idea what to do now.
Given how unpredictable politics have been in the last two years, who knows what will happen by the time the next election rolls around. But, it’s short odds for me that Gillard will be PM. Whether Abbott will still be leading the Libs is a different question. The Press now seem to be sick of bashing Gillard to quite the same extent. They’re starting to pressure Abbott just a little and he’s not handling it well.
Well, if they continue to obsess about leadership, it’s easy to predict that the “Rudd to challenge in x” stories will dry up (there probably was a moment when that was possible, but it’s passed) and they’ll return to the Coalition disunity theme.
But another hypothesis is that people aren’t taking any notice of the press memes to the same extent as they were.
The other point I’d make about this is that it should put the media commentary in perspective as mainly noise. Hence it was quite possible to ignore most of the reporting about the ALP conference on the weekend (particularly the Rudd v. Gillard stuff), take note of the directions set, and not have missed anything salient about federal politics.
No doubt we’ll be joined by some right wing commenters who’ll say “but the ALP is still behind”, but there’s an odd mindset shared by many observers where trends are discounted, where there’s an eternal present, and where turning points are missed.
I don’t get any sense whatsoever that there’s any feeling that Gillard has been subjected to disproportionate and unfair misogynistic attacks (as opposed to all those proportionate and fair ones!). the attacks continue, unabated, and the hate machine is alive and well online.
But clearly there’s something going on in the electorate. This may well make News Ltd ease off – they (at least used to) hate to be entirely on the wrong side of a contest, as it spotlights the lie that they’re terribly influential.
The point is that people are beginning to discount said attacks.
Yes I understood. But I do not get the sense that you get that there is any discounting of these attacks.
The Liberals now are in the position that Labor was in the summer of 81-82. With their poll lead, they should win the next election, but doubts are growing like bacteria in a petri dish about their Leader. The question is whether and when Turnbull (=Hawke) strikes at Abbott (=Hayden).
If Turnbull does strike successfully, then Liberals will romp it in, like Labot did in ’83.
Of course the analogy isn’t perfect. Unlike Hawke, Turnbull has been leader, unsuccessfully, and carries the baggage from that time. (Godwin Grech, anyone?) Turnbull is genuinely hated by a large of his party (the Right). Hawke was hated by the Labor Left, but they were not nearly as influential as the Liberal Right is, not to mention the Liberal Right attack media.
Gillard’s dilemma is that if she is too successful too quickly in catching up in the polls, the Liberals will dump Abbott for Turnbull and Gillard will be toast. She needs to do Abbott slowly, as Keating promised he would do to Hewson, and did.
I didn’t always agree with with Whitlam, Hawke or Keating and I know that I wont always agree with our present PM but I definitely want her on my side. Her strength in the face of an unrelenting barrage of abuse from all sides has endured for far longer than Abbott or most anybody else thought. No honeymoon for Julia, unprecedented as that alone has been in Australian politics. Aussies hate bullies and slowly but surely she is being seen as someone who has no fear of them, something too that people admire. Go Julia, I’m on the underdog!
“So tssk, you went on and on that Abbott would be in the lodge by the end of 2011…what happened?”
(me glares silently at the screen for ten minutes….go make a cup of tea….I’ll still be here………ah you’re back….finishing glare in 3,2,1)
“I think, that, says, it, all.”
(walks off with the quiet dignity of a toddler throwing themselves on the carpet in a tantrum wind up)
Seriously though…who would have thunk it? Honestly I haven’t seen any political figure bagged as much as the current PM, it’s amazing she’s survived. Also amazing all the destabilisation by the media with Rudd didn’t work after the initial tumble. I sense the media were hoping for another Latham and can’t imagine that Rudd might actually be happy where he is. The ALP need to learn to own their successes more, no-one else is going to be promoting them.
In the end Julia is still in parliament with an increased headcount. They got most of their bills through. they hosted the US president.
And what’s Abbott done? The action man.
I think Kim is right. Abbott and his boosters in the media have overplayed their hand and while they made early gains a lot of people now deal with the constant negative static it like a background drone.
Sm is right,
Turdbull is a threat to Julia, He has to move at precisely the right time – too soon and he will be seen for the patrician dolt that he really is, too late and the move will be seen as desperation.
Hey how about that Lib-bird-aryan with the wooden face that often bangs on about stuff; cannot remember her name.
Huggy
Not a bad article – at least it had some caveats about the possible outcomes it raises. Strange that it wasn’t written when the trends were running in the reverse directions! Not!
The article tries to argue against the truism that Oppositions don’t win elections – Governments lose them. Governments have the power to take action and purse strings to make it happen. Oppositions can only talk.
See you in Nov 13
By 1983 Hawke had become the PM we wanted to have. Turnbull has a long way to go before he is in the same position. There is an arrogance there that puts people off. Rudd and Turnbull do well in the polls because the other party voters prefer them. Hard to say whether this means whether they are liked enough for voters to switch.
onslaught of negativity and criticism … unfair
Could be that, but there are other explanations.
1. The European economic sewer. People might be thinking “hmmm, maybe the Government’s economic management isn’t all that bad after all”.
2. The Malaysian solution. People might be thinking, “hmmm, Abbott said he wanted to stop the boats, but he jumped into beds with Greens to harpoon a solution that would have stopped the boats”.
3. The carbon tax. People might be thinking, “Hmmm, she stuck to her guns, just like John Howard used to”.
I’m not saying there is necessarily any objective merit into what people might be thinking, but that it is what they think that counts, not whether it is correct.
Interesting that the all-Right-all-the-time media have lost interest in the boats following Abbott’s no on Malaysia. These media people can smell a dead horse at a thousand paces. The lumpenproletariat have lost interest.
John D, this is strictly anecdotal, but I’ve lost count of the number of people who have told me that they won’t vote Liberal with Abbott as leader but would in a heart beat with Turnbull.
Now, these people are hardly average or representative: they are high income earning and socially liberal; they favour gay marriage and low taxes; they decry the social inequalities created by private schools but send their kids to them; they are indifferent to unions; they think the government should spend more on universities; they can see the sense of the mining tax but not if it’s going to stuff their portfolio of mining stocks; they decry tax avoidance but have an elaborate set up of trusts so they can do just that.
They sound libertarian but they are not. They are small-l liberals.
Lindsay man and woman they are not.
There’s more of them than you might think.
Not to detract from your main point Sam, but I suspect most people can do that – particularly if the horse has been dead a while.
Sam,
Turnbull is small-l liberal but his party is not. He is too left-wing for his party and got rolled by them on the first substantive issue where that made a difference.
Turnbull as leader/PM in the next year or two will have to adopt his party’s Tory outlook or get rolled again, sooner rather than later.
I think that would be a real issue if Turnbull were Lib leader at the next election. Who/what exactly would one be voting for?
Turnbull’s best long-term bet would be to leave Abbott to get smashed at the next election and then reinvent the Libs in his image, as Blair did with the UK Labour party.
I&U: Turnbull only got rolled by one vote. In addition, if he became leader again some of the things he said in the past might come back to haunt him. He was the one that saw the solution to the GFC as cutting taxes for the rich and kicked off the pressure on the government to come back to surplus whether it made sense or not.
Turnbull nostalgia is as unreal as KRudd dreaming. If the Libs dump Abbott it willow be for him.
… will not.
Commenting from phone again!
OT: But perhaps not completely with a view to long term swings in international politics. But there is a great video from Jeffrey Sachs@google authors, which some of you might be interested in.
The dynamics of political parties seems to cause them (in my relatively limited experience) to become more extreme after defeat, followed (often after further defeats) by a grudging acceptance that they actually need to become more moderate to regain government.
The Turnbull experiment went against that pattern, but didn’t last long. I think the Liberals would need to be defeated again before they would consider turning to a left-wing leader such as Turnbull.
Sam: Lindsay men and women are changing, too. The media will cotton on to this fact about 10 years too late, but the electorate of Lindsay is steadily becoming more racially diverse. With urban consolidation – more townhouses and flats – and a more ethnically diverse population, the Libs will probably have real difficulty competing for the seat in a few years’ time.
Regrettably, and despite any recent optimism, my feeling is that in the North, the West, the South (SA) and the Middle Kingdom (NSW), the baseball bats await for the ALP. Unfortunately I don’t think it really matters who is leader of the Conservatives. Hopefully, Abbott won’t be.
I&U said:
Three points about Turnbull:
(1) The discussion on this thread rather bears out the point I made above about leadership, which goes to the further point that Abbott is only there insofar as his poll lead lasts. He’s unpopular, and a most improbable PM;
(2) Turnbull cannot conceivably lead the Liberals in this term. His entire project was to take the Libs post-Howard, and at the moment they’re showing every sign of wanting to turn the clock back – they have no post-Howard governing philosophy, and they don’t want to buy Turnbull’s;
(3) Turnbull’s popularity in the polls is mainly accounted for by approval among Labor and Greens *not* Coalition voters. Yes, if Labor recovers, they would need to win back swinging voters, but they would also bleed badly to their right (watch how Bob Katter’s party polls in Queensland next year) if Turnbull were to return. The politics of the last little while have been about the projection of the hard right Liberal “base” as if they were the nation. They’re not, but they’re not rusted onto the Libs either. It’s a lot of John Howard’s cultivation of Hansonite voters and base sentiments potentially coming home to roost.
Forget Turnbull, if Abbott gets rolled ( unlikely) it’s Hockey or Morrison.
Face it Malcolm ( in the middle) Turnbull is never going to be PM.
I thought Turnbull was crazy to take on the leadership back when he did. He should have let Abbot, and waited for one or two elections for the old guard of the Liberals to collapse. Instead his ego got the better of him.
I think Gillard is playing a long game. She’s not listening to the polls, but waiting for people to see the results of her policies on the ground.
That article made a good point about how oppositions with crushing leads don’t necessarily win office. It’s pointless to be worrying about Abbot’s poll lead at this remove. One Godwin Grech and he’s done for, regardless of people’s opinion of Gillard. I think she knows that incumbency is to her benefit over the long haul…
Kim is correct. Turnbull may come back, but not next. Hockey is Abbott’s likely successor, and thankfully for us, he’s just as inane and shallow as Abbott. The slightest scrutiny will shred the “avuncular” persona and reveal his sooky, petulant, and jaw-droppingly ignorant true colours.
Yes, well, the other names being bandied around are those of Morrison and Robb!
Hockey, imho, is much more inane and shallow than Abbott.
Yeah, Labor’s cause is not hopeless & they are certainly in a better position than they were six months ago. But don’t go overboard people – they’re coming from a long way back, their structural problems remain, and an economic downturn or a really juicy scandal – both always a possibility – would sink them beyond hope.
I think Abbott is still better than even odds to get his slimy backside into the Lodge, but it is no longer a long odds-on bet.
OK…my money is on the PM 2:1, and in a consequent slow tango with MT who has lost weight for the long haul (and a republic in 2017-20).
If not PM, Malcolm for first Pres/GG of theRepublic
The Rabbott is on …Welsh Rarebit
How about Garrett as a future ALP leader…..maybe not.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-07/alp-at-odds-over-election-review-release/3718572
The fool wants ” the sun to shine in”
Joe @27,
Meaning the left wing of the Liberal Party.
But Turnbull is probably left of some of the Labor Party too: eg on gay rights, emissions trading, republicanism etc.
Hmm. A poll. Of whom? Answering what questions? In which electorates? With what margins? And a poll of what: voting intentions? Or how people think they might vote without knowing who the candidates are on a two party preferred basis without knowing what the preference flow will be? The headline may have better read “Goat Killed Today! Entrails Say Labor Will Win! Abbot Vows Orcs Will Fight Back!”.
Well put akn, I concur.
John D @20
Turnbull only got rolled by one vote
And Peter Slipper voted for Tony Abbott: “He’s a good friend, an old friend. He came to my wedding five years ago. I supported him for the leadership,”
http://www.smh.com.au/national/slipper-jumped-to-escape-party-bullies-not-shore-up-labor-20111206-1oha9.html
The old Turnbull did himself a lot of damage every time he tried to play attack dog. If he is going to be PM he needs to learn some political skills.
The Liberal Party hates Malcolm Turnbull. It always has. It cannot abide the fact that he is a republican. To most well-adjusted Australians the fact that someone is a republican is neither here nor there, but in the weird anachronistic world of Torydom this is actually an important test (republicanism being associated in the Liberal mind with multiculturalism, Paul Keating, post-modernism, the end of the white Australia policy…..the unspoken bile that really motivates Liberals nowadays). Truth be told, it was one of the reasons Costello never had a chance.
True, people may be waiting with baseball bats, but they were itching to turf John Howard out in 2000, too. Remember: voters have two choices at the next election, but voters have never accepted that Tony Abbott is prime minister material.
Tim Macnay at 18: May be so, but there are still a helluva lot of people who still want to flog it to get it up and galloping again!!
Yes, and it must be true because last week’s goat said the same thing. Two goats in a row! Go to election now, I say. Polling has replaced politics. There’s one of the major disconnects between parties and publics right around the world. Branded parties now seek to promote their product like breakfast cereal. Voters turn away because they despair of only ever being allowed the truncated freedoms of the shopper.
Oh well, perhaps the Libs won’t win next time. But remember the lesser of two evils is still an evil.
February of next year is the half way mark of the cycle. Plenty of time for anything, in any direction, to happen.
Of course Julia Gillard can win the next election. As can Tony Abbott.
I think the Greens are a stronger political influence than the pollsters give them credit as both major parties dive to the right.
As the election draws nearer the mainstream media will bang on about how few a members there are in the Labor Party. When that occurs I will tell you how many members the Nationals have and how they were recruited and are retained – a long sleazy history of automatic direct debits out of farm bank accounts when the main wheat/wool/milk cheque came in
They might lose some seats to some right wing parties, but does that really matter? They’re about as likely to support the ALP as the Greens would support the liberal party.
any comment before July next year is irrelevant and pointless.
Cris @47: Much the same could be said about Rudd. His apparent superiority to Gillard is based on support from people who are unlikley to vote for him. The interesting poll would be one where Turnbull and Abbott are put up one on one against Gillard and Rudd
Even then preferred prime minister results are rarely a good guide for 2PP.
@48 – amd what is special about July 2012 apart from my birthday?
Why not August or perhaps Novemeber – that is after all a year out???
Obviously LTP has some insider information that is crucial to the election outcome
“Anonymous sources close to the government (has the word Labouring in hir nym) have confirmed that July 2012 is the internal deadline that factional bosses have given the Prime Minister to turn around the government’s fortunes, or else face political assassination like her predecessor. Is a ‘winter surprise’ in store for voters?”
Remember kids, you heard it here first!!
@ 50:
My birthday!
And the antipodean repeat performance of my April wedding.
That’s what’s so special about July 2012
Tony Abbott would be extremely vulnerable to a negative – that is, accurate – ad campaign. A campaign that pointed out his inconsistencies, his foul mouth, his cynicism. Perhaps most devastating, it could also paint him as he truly is – a comic figure.
Remember, the ALP is responsible for the most effective and successful scare campaign in Australian politics.
Sam@16: “Interesting that the all-Right-all-the-time media have lost interest in the boats following Abbott’s no on Malaysia.”
Thank you thank you than you! I was wondering if I was magically missing the news stories. Of course it has appeared now and then but nothing like before – even as the number of boats (I gather) has risen.
You’re evil, Mercurious.
JohnD said:
Much as the support for Gillard while Rudd was in charge was demonstrably from people who now engage in bidding wars to see who can hurl the most foul invective at her. Are we seeing a pattern here?
I’d say so.
I’d probably agree sespite the abysmal media performance by Gillard at the ALP Conference. I’ve always held that ultimately the electorate would awaken to the absolute awfulness of Abbott sometime before the next election. Unfortunately, the Libs will also wake up to this and Gillard will be facing Turnbull. not Abbott. AAnd for those of you who might think Turnbull is a nice soft cuddly Liberal option to a troglodyte Right Labor under Gillard, take some time to Listen to the man. In the long run he might turn out to be worse than Abbott on everything except climate change. (The republic doesn’t matter.)
You’re right – the republic doesn’t matter.
the obvious point that has been missed is the reaction to the ETS as it is implemented.
That is why any talk before that is pointless and irrelevent.
Will the public realise they have been wood-ducked or are they permanently offside with the current Government.
How is Europe travelling and its effect on Australia?
There are numerous others.
PaulB,
“In the long run [Turnbull] might turn out to be worse than Abbott on everything except climate change.”
I don’t know why you would say that. I don’t think that Turnbull’s policy preferences would be very different to Gillard’s. The salient difference is in their respective parties.
Turnbull’s policy preferences on IR would undoubtedly be very different to Gillard’s.
But he won’t be leader again before the election.
I’m not sure why PB said that of Turnbull either. As far as I can tell, the objectionable things about Turnbull are what he shares with Abbott and/or Gillard. He doubtless has a better position than JG on gay marriage.
I’m not clear what policy he’d pursue on asylum seekers, but it’s hard to imagine that he could be more xenophobic than TA. AIUI he favours some sort of regulation on p*ker machines. He says the NBN should be stopped but that’s the Coalition position. If he won in 2013, I suspect he’d discover unwinding it much too hard. I’m not sure he wouldn’t develop a modus vivendi on MRRT. He’d be in the pockets of the Murdochracy, but he shares that with TA as well.
I don’t care about the republic, but many left-of-centre folk do.
So no, he’s not a beacon of centre-left reason, but neither is he a hard right tub thumper.
That’s right. It will require at least one further election loss from the world’s greatest opposition leader to drag the Liberals kicking and screaming into the 20th century.
Yep, but he would lead a party that has become even more hard Right than it was last term, which is why he won’t lead it.
Fran,
http://www.smh.com.au/national/turnbull-not-in-favour-of-gay-marriage-20101115-17ukk.html
Cuppa quoted:
The tone of his remarks the other day — favouring a conscience vote and indicating the very strong support for same sex marriage rights in his electorate seemed to be a signal that he’d like the right to vote in favour. He’s a slippery character and so perhaps he was just being sly on this, and if so that’s disappointing. Even so, that would just mean he was as retrograde as Abbott and Gillard on this.
Turnbull has as few principles, little political nous and judgement and is as intemperate, arrogant and overbearing as he ever was.
Put simply, he has the same character flaws in spades that had people pointing and laughing as the Grech trap snapped shut.
But since he was deposed, for some peculiar reason, people have elevated him to sainthood and developed amnesia wrt his abysmal performance as LOTO.
Why does anyone presume that if he were to regain the position of LOTO, he would not be crucified again by the likes of Rudd, Swan, Albanese and Gillard? They had his measure then and would again.
WRT Gillard, I agree with zorronsky @11. AFAIC, she has proved she is the goods. Has a PM or other public figure, for that matter, endured such a sustained, appalling campaign of personal vilification and abuse as she has, with the guts, grace, equanimity and good humour she has shown.
This is a woman with the “heart and stomach of a prince” (with apologies to ER1). I’d rather have her going in to bat for this country than the pond scum who make up the Noalition.
Fran Barlow @68, I disagree wrt to Turnbull, Gillard and Liealot. Much as I hate to give Liealot any credit, he and Gillard have maintained their opposition (God knows why) to gay marriage.
Turnbull’s change of position shows just how devious, slippery and manipulative he is. Liealot and Gillard may be retrograde on this subject, but it seems that Turnbull’s principles are as flexible as a contortionist’s joints.
Paul Burns: you make an important point. Anyone who thinks that Malcolm Turnbull is a moderate should read his speeches sometime – particularly on economic policy. And when he was leader the party’s attitude to refugees was pretty much as vile and xenophobic as it is now.
Even assuming that he’s a closet moderate and the Libs were foolish enough to make him leader again, he would still have to follow the dictates of his party.
Malcolm Turnbull is one of the most overrated politicians in Canberra.
Turnbull, I believe, is every bit the weathervane Abbott is. Yes, he is smarter and more polished, and a helluva lot more articulate… but under the hood is driven by the same ideological engine as Abbott.
Cuppa @72, spot on.