Well that Newspoll isn’t completely bad for Malcolm Turnbull. If you were going to have a truly terrible poll, you’d pick two weeks from Christmas for it. A damn sight better than getting one just before Parliament resumes in February.
Still, 59-41. That’s almost Nelsonian in its awfulness. And the boost to the Government was in the ALP’s primary vote, up to a stratospheric 48%. That famous Rudd honeymoon is still going strong, despite most commentators declaring it over at various points in the last two years. Rudd up on satisfaction, Turnbull down, Rudd stretching his preferred Prime Minister lead to 47%.
As Alan Ramsey might — and might yet — say: Merry Christmas, Mr Rudd. The only joy for the Coalition is surely that it cannot get any worse than this, so by definition it’s all up from here.
The poll was conducted on the weekend and it’s tempting to pin it on Turnbull’s shocker of a final sitting week. Disunity is death, etc. It’s also not unreasonable to declare it doesn’t matter a great deal, two years out from an election and with no obvious replacement stalking Turnbull, with the possible exception of Hamlet Prince of Malvern.
Still, we’re one third through the Rudd Government’s first term and at some point the polls will have to start mattering, even for those of us who reflexively parrot “there’s only one poll that counts” when confronted with any numbers.
And some aspects of the two sides’ strategies have become apparent.
Glenn Milne looked at the communication styles of Rudd and Turnbull on the weekend. For once, Milne was offering genuine analysis rather than his usual partisan commentary and suggested that the Prime Minister’s tendency to jargon and complexity was appreciated by voters, who were comfortable with their wonkish PM applying himself full tilt to the financial crisis. Malcolm Turnbull, however, seemed like an inconsistent know-it-all.
It’s an important point, but I’m not sure Milne got it right. He cited the example of Rudd’s appearance on a Channel Seven special on the financial crisis, where he did a Town Hall-style interaction with an audience. Rudd’s self-deprecation and folksy manner were on high beam for that performance. But those types of events are rare. Voters’ normal exposure to politicians is via the nightly television news, which feature only soundbites or brief grabs from Question Time.
It’s not Rudd’s verbal complexity that comes through in those moments, but the Government’s carefully-selected keywords, which they emphasise day in and day out. Rudd and Swan continue to belt “decisively” out in media releases, answers to Dorothy Dixers and press conferences. It’s relentless. The word induces laughter and derision in Question Time from Coalition MPs. When Anthony Albanese rose last Thursday before Question Time to tell everyone how long they would be kept back due to the Senate’s sloth, he joked that the Government “always acts decisively.” It doesn’t matter that MPs, or the Press Gallery, think it’s a joke. Repetition — incessant repetition — works.
Quite what Turnbull’s communication strategy is, isn’t clear. He enjoys deploying his intellect and argumentative skills to critique Government actions. The problem is that it frequently leads him into arcane and obscure areas. His Press Club address on 24 November was aimed at issues such as the operation of the bank guarantee and reform of bankruptcy laws. While Turnbull’s mastery of economic and financial issues was plain, he never had much chance of disrupting the Government’s first birthday with a speech like that, even with the Prime Minister out of the country. And while the Government shamelessly fires its key words at voters over and over, Turnbull alights on some phrases, like “leave pass” for a few days, only to fly off to another. His chances of painting any sort of picture of the Government for voters with such a random approach are next to none.
It probably doesn’t help that none of his main offsiders Andrew Robb, Warren Truss and Julie Bishop would plead guilty to being charismatic communicators.
In short, while the Government keeps its message targeted and repetitive, Turnbull is too complex and too busy. This might also reflect that he has less Parliamentary experience than any Opposition leader since John Hewson. And he’s not surrounded by much in the way of experience. Hardly anyone on the Coalition side except Robb have experienced opposition, and Robb only did so as federal director.
Turnbull needs a strategy — or at least a consistent idea — for how he wants to portray the Government and his own side. It won’t turn the polls around by itself, but it’s one of the many areas in which the Government is currently easily out-performing the Opposition.
And according to Crikey bloggers:
William Bowe: The leadership ratings suggest voting intention would have been even worse for the Coalition if Brendan Nelson was still leader. Turnbull’s approval rating is still seven points higher than Nelson’s best result, and the 47 per cent gap on preferred prime minister is roughly equal to what Nelson managed when Rudd’s approval was in the mid-50s. Read the full post here at The Poll Bludger.
Possum Comitatus: Rudd’s net satisfaction started lifting dramatically in October, but there was a bit of a lag when it came to the vote estimates flowing through mirroring that satisfaction boost (which they nearly always, eventually do) — we can probably put that lag down to Turnbull. It might look bad for Truffles, but he does seem to be minimising the vote damage from a resurgent Rudd and being reasonably successful at delaying its full effect. Read the full post here at Possum’s Pollytics blog.
Hi from Harvey (psychology, psychology, psychology is everything) Tarvydas.
It can’t get worse may be a reasonable conclusion evolving from political analysis but it will get worse says my informed psychological analysis. (you’ve got to know there’s a difference).
Howard got his good numbers as a trickster (one of the new concepts for Howard’s liberal party ideology). Rudd has earned them deservedly. Even a beheaded chook can tell the difference. If you can’t then don’t learn politics see a psychologist.
Rudd has various weaknesses. Notice how he rushed back to Brisbane after some seriously bad weather in between about 3 other urgent destinations. The man is working in an unsustainable way and was one bout of flu and one parliamentary week from crashing spectacularly in public. He should have delegated the Brisbane storms empathy to a a prominent worthy like Howard did with that army guy (?!) up north. And what’s the bet this work pattern leads to a binge drinking event? It’s in his nature.
(I know that’s harsh but then it’s his govt that’s killing the globally important East Gippsland forests so he deserves the lot.)
Fact is Rudd is riding so high in the polls because he is cannabilising/harvesting the position of his ALP tribe. Burning out cannon fodder staff. And grabbing too much profile rather than delegating. The guy is a walking daisy cutter – just like John Howard. He even has the same frump. It worked for Howard but it killed the Govt in the end. I fell asleep laughing last night watching Howard Years IV. Was the end also tragic?
Notice that Latham wrong footed Howard by making his own directions. Is Turnbull lacking in creativity? He organised his own tax review etc. It couldn’t be that hard to work out a quick better use of $10B in pump priming. What about ramping solar installations? Including by importation of shortfalls in local capacity?
Anyway Rudd is in significant part reacting to the Opposition and cross bench attack for 12 months on the pitiful income of pensioners. Why don’t the Opposition claim it? And ask why it took 12 months for Rudd to act?
Turnbull’s not cutting leadership because he’s despairing of the mugs around and opposite him and its all over his face. Turnbull is so frustrated he’s furious that in five seconds of arriving as a leader in the Australian Parliament no one’s taking much notice or appreciating his presence. He’s not the spectacular difference he thought he would. He’s confounding himself. That’s part of the snobby, privileged background psyche not so much related to wealth but his view of himself as above the rest. All the runs on the board and the street kids are thrashing him. It was all so different when the playing field was civilised.
1. binge drinking is in his nature … forever, which is why he opposes alcohol so conspicuously (out, out damn spot); and 2. his wife is a frumpy fattty, albeit a really rich one, who can’t represent Australia very well looking like a Gold Coast Big Pear tourist attraction.
Dave Lieberts has one major flaw in his comments – Costello develops a spine!!!