Kevin Rudd and the ALP’s approval ratings took another hit yesterday, with Newspoll, Galaxy and Essential all coming in with a two party preferred vote of 50-50 — which, if accurate, would see Labor lose government — and Rudd’s approval holding at a low 39% for Newspoll and sinking three to 42% for Galaxy.
So what’s wrong with Kevin?
Yesterday, Crikey‘s Canberra correspondent Bernard Keane published the first part in his special report into what’s really behind Labor’s plummeting poll numbers:
… this collapse has been swift and has been focussed entirely on Rudd, whose appeal to voters has collapsed as spectacularly as Labor’s vote.
…
In his pursuit of the prime ministership, much of Rudd’s political persona … consisted of what people projected onto him, rather than what he projected.
Stay tuned for part two in today’s Crikey Daily Mail.
With Rudd on the nose with voters, many are now speculating about whether the ALP would be better off replacing him with his more popular right-hand-woman Gillard. In yesterday’s editorial, we argued:
The fact that some dogs are barking about Gillard now is little more than a media beat-up. But that won’t be the case after this year’s election, unless Rudd is able to improve the government’s margin, which seems highly unlikely.
… That’s when the Gillard bandwagon will become a real bandwagon.
Take a look at who and what the nation’s pundits are blaming for Rudd’s polling pain, and whether they’re hopping on board the Gillard bandwagon themselves:
The Australian
Dennis Shanahan: It all comes down to belief in leaders
… fewer and fewer voters are believing Rudd, and their disbelief or scepticism is shifting to the entire Rudd government and its attempts to restore fiscal conservatism.
Peter van Onselen: Gillard shapes up as Libs’ next target
Rudd revealed himself to be a callow politician who stands for very little when he dumped his commitment to an emissions trading scheme some weeks ago.
Samantha Maiden: Julia unassuming, despite poll
More than ever, the orthodoxy about Julia Gillard never being a serious player for the leadership because of her historical ties to the Left is looking hollow.
… one day they are more likely than not to give Gillard a go.
Jack the Insider: Never too old to ask for help
[Rudd] has failed to heed the old adage to never give a mug an even break and now will struggle to break even at the next election.
Sydney Morning Herald
Phillip Coorey: Rudd needs his dunny-cleaning mates – and that’s the bottom line
Rudd, who is suddenly short of friends and is inconceivably the subject of leadership tittle-tattle, is not only trying to keep those he wooed to Labor in 2007, he is no longer taking the traditional friends for granted.
The Age
Mark Davis: The myth of the post budget bounce
… a government’s standing in the polls has more to do with the wider political and economic context than with the political management of the annual budget ritual.
Herald Sun
Phillip Hudson: Julia Gillard’s loyalty program is the one thing Kevin Rudd needs most
… the alarming thing for Rudd is the chatter about the Gillard ascendancy. It wouldn’t happen if he was on top of his game.
Courier Mail
Paul Williams: Odds still with Rudd
From bungled roof insulation programs and an overblown building education revolution to a shelved emissions trading scheme and a poorly sold super-profits mining tax, Labor’s undeniable clumsiness has seen its primary vote collapse eight points in just a few months.
ABC
Niki Savva: Gillard may save Labor but who will save Rudd?
[Rudd] had so much political capital but instead of spending it wisely, as an investment in his future, he squandered it.
Just when you think Tony Abbott is making some headway, he comes out with a classic comment like:
“Don’t believe anything I say unless I am reading it from a written document prepared by someone else.”
I tend to believe this is similar to Obama’s crash in the polls – high expectations, low returns.
As the election approaches, and the Government starts to pump up the volume in Parliament, you will see Abbott make more and more stammering gaffs, and all those young folk who were giving Rudd a whack over the ETS will remember the alternative
If voters and commentators could step back from the sporting match / political soap opera of Rudd vs Abbott, it is pretty easy to see that when it comes to actions, both parties are very similar.
Rudd has used massive spin to create his revolutions. But look behind each “revolution” to action and pretty much everything he has done could have happened under a Coalition government led by, for example, Turnbull.
The huge media bias of concentrating on Rudd vs Abbott is that the possibility of moving to some real progressive alternative, where the actions match the words, is simply not discussed.
It also creates the impression that more progressive actions are “looney left”, when most of what is proposed by The Greens is in fact fairly centre compared to what happens in the rest of the OECD countries.
It makes little difference to the vested interests whether or not it is Abbott or Rudd who wins the next election. And as long as 99% of the discussion and coverage focusses on them it is certain that nothing will change.
Whats wrong with Australian voters? We’ve had Howard turfed out in 2007, not only losing the election but losing his seat. As a result we’ve had 4 Liberal leaders in 3 years and now the knives are out for Rudd? Considering that Rudd has only been ALP leader for 3 years after taking over from Beazley that would make 6 leaders of the Libs/Labor in 3 years.
Wake up Australia, you bunch of idiots.
time to bring out an old chesnut:
“How can you tell when Tony Abbott is lying?”
“His lips move.”
thank-you, I’m here all week. Try the fish.
The two most blatent lies I have seen recently..
1 – The Thai Prime Minister saying that the troops were only firing in self-defence.
2 – Rudd saying that he was committed to action on climate change.
The TV coverage (and the excellent article that Crikey pointed us to) show how the Thai military are killing innocents.
And the almost total lack of action (apart from spin and work on the CPRS) proves that Rudd has never thought of climate change as a serious environmental and economic threat.
And third prize goes to Senator Conroy for saying (with a straight face) that he would not expand the scope of the internet filter.
Firstly, this was said just after Rudd had backflipped on ETS, childcare, and more. Secondly, Conroy knows perfectly well that the way to expand what is banned is simply to add to the list of what is Refused Classification.
I think Abbott is lying when he does not deny climate change. But sometimes Abbott is just all over the place and changes his mind.
Now I know that most of you hate The Greens. But surely they deserve praise for being honest about what they want and why.