ALP still in trouble.

[Goldenblue]

Labor still struggling in polls
07:38 AEDT Tue Feb 22 2005


The ALP would have suffered a similar loss to the Howard government as it did last October if an election had been held at the weekend, a new poll shows.

The coalition commands a six percentage point two-party preferred lead over Labor - 53 per cent to 47 per cent, a Newspoll published by The Australian reports.

The result was almost the same as the election in which Mark Latham's Labor could only muster 37.6 per cent of primary votes to the coalition's 47 per cent.

New Labor leader Kim Beazley's personal approval rating has climbed slightly to 43 per cent but despite a five-point drop, John Howard was still well ahead at 58 per cent.

Mr Beazley's performance was better than his predecessor, Mr Latham, who in the last days of his leadership earlier this year could only muster 34 per cent.

Mr Howard's dissatisfaction rating has climbed from 28 to 32 per cent but so has Mr Beazley's, from 22 to 26 per cent.

Mr Latham fared much worse, with his dissatisfaction rating in December and January as high as 50 per cent.

Mr Howard also stayed well ahead as preferred prime minister, registering 54 per cent to Mr Beazley's two per cent climb to 29 per cent.

As preferred PM, Mr Howard has dropped from a high of 60 per cent in December.


The ALP are really beginning to look like a Claytons party. Lack of policies, vision and bitter infighting will leave the ALP in opposition for many years to come.

My best bet is that the next ALP PM has not joined the ALP yet.

 

[finders]

Not in Victoria Mate!
I wonder how long the power brokers in the Libs will put up with dopey Doyle?

Victorian ALP Regains Primary Support in February, Up 5% to 48.5%State Poll : Finding No. 3837 : March 6, 2005


During February, primary support for the Victorian ALP Government rose 5% to 48.5%, while primary support for the Liberal Party fell 3.5%, to 37%.
On a two-party preferred basis, ALP support rose 4.5% to 56.5%, with L-NP support at 43.5% (down 4.5%). If a Victorian State election had been held in February, the ALP would have won, the latest Morgan Poll finds. Full article.

http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2005/3837/

 

[- PC -]

When will Labor be ''out of trouble' GB? Beazley has provided an alternative voice and your comments over infighting are a bit hysterical , unless I am missing something here in the west .I think Beazley is on a slowly slowly course and he is getting his digs in and letting the apprpriate people have their say.


As a Labor preferred voter I cant see anything wrong or ''troublesome''

 

[demon_dave]

When will Labor be ''out of trouble' GB? Beazley has provided an alternative voice and your comments over infighting are a bit hysterical , unless I am missing something here in the west .I think Beazley is on a slowly slowly course and he is getting his digs in and letting the apprpriate people have their say.


As a Labor preferred voter I cant see anything wrong or ''troublesome''

its steady as she goes, plenty of time

 

[finders]

Im not a Fatboy fan but it looks like he is trying a lot harder this time round.
Atleast he seems to have cut out a lot of the waffle BS.

 

[Dippers Donuts]

The next newspoll whenever it comes out should be interesting as Howard might be held to account for his lies on interest rates.

Ultimately I suppose it doesn't really matter for another couple of years until the next election campaign. Agree that Beazely seems to be waffling less these days.

 

[ablett factor]

whatever happens with the ALP they have to aim for a long term approach as the chances of them winning the 2007 election are near impossible and their aim has to be to gain seats and make 2010 easier. whether beazley can lead them back to government i dont know, he could be similar to howard in the way that he'll come back out of nowhere and become PM.

 

[Goldenblue]

When will Labor be ''out of trouble' GB?

When they have vision, real policies, and are united to defeat the Libs. Too many populist policies under Latham showed how desperate they were to regain power and were not ready to handle a piggy bank or an economy.

Beazley has provided an alternative voice and your comments over infighting are a bit hysterical , unless I am missing something here in the west.

The comments over infighting is not hysterical at all, it has been one of the biggest problems the ALP have faced. Too many pollies are in it for themselves instead of working as a team. Hell, even Gallop won an election over here and the factional brawls over portfolios have already started. Disunity is setting in.

As a Labor preferred voter I cant see anything wrong or ''troublesome''

As a swinging voter, the ALP are pathetic, void of ideas and only hoping to regain power on a bad economy or the "it's time" factor. Sorry, most voters are smarter than that.

I think Beazley is on a slowly slowly course and he is getting his digs in and letting the apprpriate people have their say.

Digs won't do anything. The Libs are way stronger than the ALP and anything Beazley may say is water of a ducks back. The ALP need to get together, work towards the next election and come up with a vision and ideas that will show them as a credible alternative government. They need to learn from the devastating loss they just suffered. Too many of the "true believers" thought Latham would be PM by now. Problem was, many voters saw this fool for what he is - a complete twit. Bad language does not make you a strong leader.

The ALP have 2.5 years to become a credible alternative government, or it could be assigned to the history pages for another decade.

 

[- PC -]

The ALP have 2.5 years to become a credible alternative government, or it could be assigned to the history pages for another decade.

So you would prefer the ALP to come out swinging now? Put all their shots across the bow now? That is political suicide IMO.

As I pointed out I like how they are slowly slowly approaching it and building credibility again. If you want the rant rave crash bang style get Latham back. You may be right in saying 2007 may be out of reach and certainly numbers would indicate that. But by your own admission ( and many others) as a swinging voter you will vote on

1. The performance of the incumbent government

2. The perceived abilities of the opposition.

3. Personal circumstances.( maybe this should be 1)

So while 2007 numerically is out a change in Liberal leadership and rising rates etc then number 3 may well be the most important


So if their is any perceived lack of style by the opposition their base drops lower. But if there is a perception that the opposition can be a viable government then they will garner more votes on the day.

Once again I am happy with the course taken

 

[shacka]

Yea i don't see this as a big problem for the ALP at the moment. I can't remember an opposition whose approval rating climbed after loosing an election. If the figures are the same in 18 months then they can start to worry.

 

[Goldenblue]

So you would prefer the ALP to come out swinging now? Put all their shots across the bow now? That is political suicide IMO.

As I pointed out I like how they are slowly slowly approaching it and building credibility again. If you want the rant rave crash bang style get Latham back. You may be right in saying 2007 may be out of reach and certainly numbers would indicate that. But by your own admission ( and many others) as a swinging voter you will vote on

1. The performance of the incumbent government

2. The perceived abilities of the opposition.

3. Personal circumstances.( maybe this should be 1)

So while 2007 numerically is out a change in Liberal leadership and rising rates etc then number 3 may well be the most important


So if their is any perceived lack of style by the opposition their base drops lower. But if there is a perception that the opposition can be a viable government then they will garner more votes on the day.

Once again I am happy with the course taken

So you are saying that they are now a credible alternative govt? I am stating that they have 2.5 years to become one. As the polls suggest, Beazley and the ALP have not raised a dent in their standings. They need to show they can be a credible force and it will take time, a lot of time. Planning is needed now for the next election in the way of policies, programs, the economy, industrial relations and infrastructure.

If the ALP is hoping rising interest rates will be enough to turf out Howard / Costello, then they are a party that deserves to be in opposition. The ALP lack vision as a party and what also may harm them is the potential strikes that may occur after the Libs take control of the senate. Most people have the perception that the ALP are endorsing this type of action due to the association they have with the Unions. Howard will play this card well.

Policies, vision and unity are what the ALP need. At the moment, the ALP are lacking all 3 basics of winning back government. Beazley and his best ministers are needing to start this now.

Latham is gone, time to start again.

 

[- PC -]

So you are saying that they are now a credible alternative govt?

No but neither am I saying they are in trouble.

I am stating that they have 2.5 years to become one. As the polls suggest, Beazley and the ALP have not raised a dent in their standings. They need to show they can be a credible force and it will take time, a lot of time. Planning is needed now for the next election in the way of policies, programs, the economy, industrial relations and infrastructure.

Fair enough but in this ''instant age'' buildng policies now is a waste of time. They first need to build credibility.To do that after the policy on the run style of Latham needs IMO a quiet footstep. Also JWH will use any good policy the ALP trumpet. The time is not now.

I guess I dont see the Labor party in as negative light as you. I dont see them in trouble I see them as building credibility

 

[kirky]

If the ALP is hoping rising interest rates will be enough to turf out Howard / Costello, then they are a party that deserves to be in opposition. The ALP lack vision as a party and what also may harm them is the potential strikes that may occur after the Libs take control of the senate. Most people have the perception that the ALP are endorsing this type of action due to the association they have with the Unions. Howard will play this card well.

Policies, vision and unity are what the ALP need. At the moment, the ALP are lacking all 3 basics of winning back government. Beazley and his best ministers are needing to start this now.

Latham is gone, time to start again.

Governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them. Why did Fraser lose in 1983? - because we had a recession, wage freeze and high interest rates (for that time) and why did Keating lose in 1996? - he was seen as arrogant and lacking compassion plus the infamous debt truck. In both cases, you and me could have got elected, it was that simple. Now, if Australia ends up with a recession, higher interest rates, worsening Current Account Deficit (7% is higher than ever) and net debt continues to increase, this Government will be out on its ear and especially so if Costello is leading the party (he will be seen as the guilty one given he was Treasurer). What the ALP has to do is present itself as a viable alternative, nothing too dramatic but to back up why the people should throw out the government. And as I have stated before, when governments change the swing is in the order of 5% - still making it possible for the ALP to obtain enough seats.

 

[shacka]

Governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them. Why did Fraser lose in 1983? - because we had a recession, wage freeze and high interest rates (for that time) and why did Keating lose in 1996? - he was seen as arrogant and lacking compassion plus the infamous debt truck. In both cases, you and me could have got elected, it was that simple.

Whilst i think this can be true to an extent, i think it's a bit of an oversimplification. Hewson and Beazley have both lost elections they should have one. The opposition is just as capable as defeating themselves as the government is.

 

[you idiot sheehan]

Whilst i think this can be true to an extent, i think it's a bit of an oversimplification. Hewson and Beazley have both lost elections they should have one. The opposition is just as capable as defeating themselves as the government is.

This is true.

 

[kirky]

Whilst i think this can be true to an extent, i think it's a bit of an oversimplification. Hewson and Beazley have both lost elections they should have one. The opposition is just as capable as defeating themselves as the government is.

Whilst it is possible, there was no way that Hewson was ever going to get elected with the introduction of a new tax and one that he had problems explaining to the populace (remember the cake shop!!) and then in 1998 Beazley actually got 51.1% of the TPP, yet didn't win gain enough in the seats that counted. Most times we get sick and tired of the government and allow the others to gain office, which is why this government if it doesn't lose the next election then it will more than likely lose the one after.

 

[finders]

Just an example of how the political position can change from a seemingly impossible position to victory. In 1976 the Victorian ALP had one of its worst defeats ever (much worse than the present Fed opposition) and only six years later it was swept to victory.
If the ecomomy goes as bad as some economists expect then nothing will save the Rodent or Costello. A Mr M Turnbull will be watching with a little interest I suspect.

 

[Goldenblue]

Governments lose elections rather than oppositions win them. Why did Fraser lose in 1983? - because we had a recession, wage freeze and high interest rates (for that time) and why did Keating lose in 1996? - he was seen as arrogant and lacking compassion plus the infamous debt truck. In both cases, you and me could have got elected, it was that simple. Now, if Australia ends up with a recession, higher interest rates, worsening Current Account Deficit (7% is higher than ever) and net debt continues to increase, this Government will be out on its ear and especially so if Costello is leading the party (he will be seen as the guilty one given he was Treasurer). What the ALP has to do is present itself as a viable alternative, nothing too dramatic but to back up why the people should throw out the government. And as I have stated before, when governments change the swing is in the order of 5% - still making it possible for the ALP to obtain enough seats.

Fair enough, however if the ALP have no vision for these problems or lack sustainable policies they still won't get elected.

Hawke came in with the accord and other policies including the environment.
Howard came in when the economy was good and because the public were sick of Keating.

Would Latham have been elected on Oct 9th if Howard had us in a recession, high interest rates etc etc etc? I don't think so somehow, they (the ALP) had no visions, plain stupid policies and would have sent Australia into the ground.