Adelaide’s Advertiser newspaper today carries a slightly curious poll of voting intention in Boothby, held for the Liberals by Andrew Southcott on a margin of 5.4 per cent. Conducted by phone from a sample of 649, it shows Southcott leading Labor candidate Nicole Cornes by an improbable 49 per cent to 32 per cent after distribution of the undecided. No two-party result is provided, but commenter Matthew Sykes has transcribed the paper’s large volume of generally unilluminating data from the poll throughout the previous comments thread. No doubt the Advertiser’s pollsters do their best, but my mind is drawn back to the final week of the state election campaign last March, when it ran a poll showing the Liberals neck-and-neck in Norwood and set to retain Hartley. Labor went on to win the seats with respective margins of 4.2 per cent and 4.6 per cent.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Advertiser Boothby poll
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
516 Comments
I live beside Boothby and most of my mates live there. Labor’s selection of Cornes was an absolute disaster. She’s been successfully stereotyped by the Libs as a bimbo and the local press call her Candidate for Booby, after a revealing dress she wore to the Governor’s retirement function. This is a seat that the ALP have squandered.
Well someone should point out that the Liberal vote is soft, people are just saying they will vote Liberal, but don’t actually mean it and that internal polling shows Labor will win comfortably. (Does internal pollling mean tenderly asking yourself who you hope will win?)
Apparently she did a terrible radio interview this morning, and couldn’t answer questions on Labor’s IR policy.
Her radio interview was not that bad. Much was made of one hestitation.
Boothby was probably always a long shot anyway for the ALP. As long as they win the 3 marginals in SA, that’ll probably be enough.
You never know, Sturt might be more of a prospect. I believe the Labor candidate in that seat is quite impressive, and I’d dearly love to see Pyne get knocked off.
This is another example of the real power of the press,they get to choose what the story is to be, and what stories to ignore. This story provides them with an opportunity to spin an “image over substance” narrative which they can weave into other election issues.
The Liberals dodged a bullet with this seat, Labor shot themselves in the foot im sure there would have been a good non-union official candidate to run against Southcott and win on the big swing in SA…regardless of how small this sample size is you’d expect Labor to be ahead…maybe Labor’s overall lead is overblown too…one can only hope!
Interesting tidbit on the inaccuracy of past Advertiser polls. I think it will be a close one either way.
WTF? Are you saying Nicole Cornes is a union official!? You really have swallowed the Liberal playbook whole.
ShowsOn you misread my post im afraid…
i said that “im sure there would have been a good non-union official candidate to run against Southcott” in other words someone like Nicole Cornes only with some sort of political experience/background…but obviously they couldnt and now they are stuck with a dead loss…i never said Cornes was a Union-Official i was saying the ALP could of found a non-Union official better than Cornes to run in Boothby
If Labor is doing so badly in Boothby, but so well in SA as a whole, they must be doing really well in the other seats.
Swings and roundabouts.
She may still win the seat, in that case, you will be wrong.
Glen, this presumption that it is poisonous to be a union official is totally baseless. Union officials by the nature of their job negotiate with business leaders. Politics is similarly a job based around negotiation, hence they natural marrying of skills and hence the history of ex union officials making a good contribution to public life in Australia. Furthermore, being a union official at some point in your life does not make it your life’s sole purpose.
If the issue is a lack diversity in the background of ALP members then you would also have to be critical of the cabinet because it is almost entirely composed of lawyers. Howard, Costello, Abbott, Bishop, Ruddock & Hockey (who was also a political staffer before being elected) to name a few.
At the end of the day, this anti union rhetoric may appeal to the conservative base (of which you are a member) but your average shmoe couldn’t give a stuff about it, especially given that the vast majority of employees in this country are saved the anguish of having to negotiate their own terms at work, because a Union does it for them, pro bono. It’s a third rate argument – hence the fact it is only at the 5th campaign that it has been raised as a major issue.
Not on polling like this ShowsOn she wont…
On polling for the whole of SA she won’t need to
The electorate tends to be able to smell out a fraud. She hasn’t got a prayer.
The swings could be in Labor safe seats lol then Southcott would easily hold Boothby against a second rate candidate…
Dario i suppose you are referring to the inflated polling figures in which at least half or more of Labor’s 20 odd point lead is soft…even you should be skeptical of figures like that they rarely happen in reality…
WTF were labor thinking pre-selecting this woman???
Is it too late to change the candidate? Could she come up with a mystery illness or something and withdraw???
according to SportingBet:
Seat of KINGSTON – SA
Amanda RIshworth – ALP 1.05Â Â
Kym Richardson – LP 8.00Â Â
Seat of HINDMARSH – SA
Steve Georganas – ALP 1.05Â Â
Rita Bouras – LP 8.00Â Â
Seat of BOOTHBY – SA
Nicole Cornes – ALP 2.00Â Â
Andrew Southcott – LP 1.70Â Â
Seat of ADELAIDE – SA
Kate Ellis – ALP 1.08Â Â
Tracy Marsh – LP 7.50Â Â
Seat of WAKEFIELD – SA
Nick Champion – ALP 1.33Â Â
David Fawcett – LP 3.00Â Â
Seat of MAKIN – SA
Tony Zappia – ALP 1.30Â Â
Bob Day – LP 2.80Â Â
Seat of STURT – SA
Mia Handshin – ALP 2.65Â Â
Christopher Pyne – LP 1.45Â Â
I seem to recall how a Liberal candidate with no particular qualifications became an impregnable member in an SA marginal seat even after she took her boyfriend overseas at public expense.
But at least she’s never voted for the other side like Cornes has and at least she was a member of the Party when she became a candidate unlike Cornes again…
“She” also happens to be a fundamentalist wacko who’s absence will only improve parliament.
Any word on how Mia Handshin is travelling in Sturt?
Christopher Pyne clearly isn’t wanted by his own party.
ShowsOn, if the electorate voted for her because that’s what they like about her, then good for her.
Picking the right candidate for an electorate is sometimes hard and the ALP haven’t done themselves any favours in Boothby.
This is all a lot of tosh. Once the campaign starts everyone will focus on the national campaign and the party leaders, and in suburban seats local candidate factors won’t matter very much. If there is a big swing on across Adelaide, Boothby will go with the flow, whether the ALP candidate is good, bad or clinically dead.
Well im sure Cornes and Draiper will enjoy not being in Parliament next year together!
…clinically dead? then there’d be a by-election
ah, actually, a special election if it was before election day…
And I think Adam maybe right about Boothby if there is a large general swing. I am reminded of the seat of Swan Hills in the WA state election in 2001. The Jaye Radisich was preselected because the usual ALP candidate for this fairly-safe Liberal seat forgot to nominate. Much was made of her not winning, but come the election & Gallop’s overall win, she won on 52:48 2pp. Once elected she then built upon the vote (54:46 off 45% primary).
Is it too late to get a new Labor candidate for Boothby? Surely there is someone who could do a better job than Mrs Cornes?
Glen, the new ALP candidate for Cowper is a small businessman well known in the area. Not all Labor people are union officials.
Cornes’ selection was the brainchild of Kevin Foley, a political lightweight if ever there was one, when Labor thought the seat was not winnable.
I’m not sure what the basis of Cornes’ glamor status/selection was other than being the second wife of Graham Cornes (famous AFL football personality).
That alone would be enough to alienate members of the ‘first wives club’ and their fellow travelers and given the demographic of the seat it’s a bit like running Sheik Hilaly in Wentworth.
Cornes’ mismatch highlights the digressed theme of union official candidates in that if a party makes a selection on considerations other than merit they will not maximize their vote. This may not be an issue in Port Adelaide where a union secretary may even enhance the vote, but in the now marginal seat of Boothby the accident prone Cornes is a serious mismatch.
“The electorate tends to be able to smell out a fraud”
I doubt that very much, they voted Howard in again and again. Don’t underestimate the power of t’s and a! She is a 50/50 in winning the seat. Your photo alone probably counts for 10% at any election, local, state, and federal.
Howard Hater, do you live in Adelaide? If so, stop whinging and go and help the campaign. If not, send some money. In any case, if you’re going to be spooked by one day’s blackguarding of a Labor candidate in the Murdoch press you’re not up to much. We’ve got weeks of this to go yet, so get used to it. It’s time for loyalty and some testicular fortitude. Nicole may be a bimbo (I’ve no idea), but she’s our bimbo and you should support her regardless, so there.
Mrs Cornes is by all accounts quite personable and charming in person, so will most likely have an impact on those she does actually talk to. The problem in Adelaide is she is well-known for being the wife of Graham Cornes, the inaugural coach of the Adelaide Crows.She engenders much debate amongst the people I have talked about it with. A posthumous reflection will be the only way we will truly be able to call this one. BTW William, I was the one writing the Boothby figures in the other thread, not Matthew Flinders, although I do work at Flinders
Adam, you’re being very tribal.
Cornes’ interview (Scroll to 23minute 30sec)
http://www.abc.net.au/adelaide/morning/wednesdayx.asx
I think this slagging off of Nicola Cornes is totally missing the point and slightly unpleasant. She is not a bimbo or anywhere near that. Nicola Cornes may not appeal to Labor voters but that is not who she is aiming at. I heard her first radio conference and what this ‘disaster’ was is that she did not want to answer questions on policy because she had only just indicated she would run. Because this is not the usual form for a politician she received a full out attack from the ABC. The trouble was that to most ordinary people not talking about policy until you are up to speed on it seems reasonable enough, and the call-in after the ABC attacked her was actually quite supportive. Boothby takes in areas that would never vote for a traditional ALP candidate and the Advertiser poll, like most political stuff it does is not worth a thing. She may not make sense to political insiders, but then not a lot of what has gone on this year has.
I am indeed very tribal, AC, and make no apologies for it. If Howard Hater wants to get rid of Howard, he/she has to get with the program. I don’t care if Cornes can’t count to five, she’s had the courage to do something to get Howard out, and she should be supported.
This article really is very poorly written. Within the space of two very small columns on the front page they made two very sloppy mistakes. Firstly, they quoted the 2pp as 54-24, obviously it was meant to be 54-46. This one I can forgive perhaps as a misprint, but the second one is just rediculous. According to the Advertiser this increases the 2pp from 5.4% to 8%……. errrr no! The whole story is then based around the premise that the Libs were expanding their lead in Boothby against the state trend. If this poll is accurate the lead has decreased albeit slightly in relation to the rest of the state. This is very poor journalism even by the Advertiser’s standards
maybe i should write for the Advertiser as I don’t proof read posts before I print them…..
Howard Hater may discover that he/she might actually miss Howard when he is gone. Sometimes it is like that with a parent figure. John Howard has been around for a long time, and many young people have grown up with him, and known no-one else as Prime Minister. A lot of this Howard hating business is just a stage of teenage rebellion that most grow out of when they learn more about the world.
Most of the comments about Nicole Cornes sound very sexist to me.
A couple of weeks ago, Andrew Southcott was on PM answering questions about politic parties using automated phone calls to voters:
Full report is here
Mr Southcott has been member for Boothby for over 11 years and he gives answers like this. Perhaps Ms Cornes isn’t so bad after all.
I’m with Adam (probably after this morning in the other thread he wont want me but I’m a tough girl). Speaking of tough girls and feminism there is a fascinating article at the top at salon.com well worth a read.
As I said in another thread, Humphrey B Bear could win Boothby for the ALP.
Cornes as an opposition candidate got to be interviewed on radio, a big plus. Matt Abraham asked her about ALP policy on IR and she fumbled, so what. At least she scored some points.
Good on ya Nicole, if this is the best they can do against you.
Did the advertiser poll other seats? I wonder if women hate the member for Mayo?
The people of Adelaide know Nicole Cornes as a ‘celebrity’, here you are a celebrity if you are married to a(n ex-) footballer, and have been subjected to a weekly newspaper column of her personal opinions for years, a lot of people did not like this column, so unfortunately people may already feel they know her, as an unknown quantity she probably would have done a lot better.
I
Adam, I think quality of candidates does matter. Having an exceptional candidate will clearly increase the swing towards you, having a complete dud will act in reverse. If people have doubts over voting Labor due to the local candidate, those doubts will persist on polling day, as the candidate’s name is written very clearly on the ballot paper.
I still hope she wins of course!
Slightly on topic but given the football connection. Get Up’s ad for the Grand Final – climate cleverer
https://www.getup.org.au/campaign/ClimateCleverer&id=126
at least the voters of Boothby know the name of who they are voting for, i bet theres a few who dont lol.
anyone who is slagging Mrs Cornes for a couple of interview stumbles has no idea of what it’s like, especially in the beginning in front of a camera or mike, i spent years when i was having a camera shoved in my face or a mike thrust at me, believe me it’s terrifying, after quite a long time of peace at a recent filming for part of a series i shook, i would say for the pollies it would become part of their normal persona after a while, but for a raw chum– well it’s stupefying, i eventually turned myself into a robot, i’d flick the on switch, say my piece and firmly press the off button, having cameramen chase you down the street and reporters putting their own words in when you refuse to speak isnt something to be envied believe me!
#Adam 24
Again i agree with you.. National swing and local politics mean nothing. Nonetheless if Southcott does win by a handful of votes than in a small way it would mean something.
Cornes should never have been preselected in the first place, she is a five minute drip.
Joins the party and then becomes a candidate and why because of the name Cornes.. Her ideas and knowledge mean nothing. Another Kirstie Marshall i am afraid… feel sorry for local branches.
Hope Rudd runs with this.
ANZ Bank chief economist Saul Eslake says the Federal Government should have made better use of the revenue it has made from Australia’s resources boom.
Mr Eslake has addressed the Australian British Chamber of Commerce and told the gathering the Government has spent or given away almost every single dollar associated with the windfall gains.
He says it has put upward pressure on interest rates and the money should have been used to address some of the national issues.
The only problem i have is what exactly are those national issues…as Eslake is another economic rationalist who i think wants a deregulated labor market.
37
Adam Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
I am indeed very tribal, AC, and make no apologies for it. If Howard Hater wants to get rid of Howard, he/she has to get with the program. I don’t care if Cornes can’t count to five, she’s had the courage to do something to get Howard out, and she should be supported.
…..
Way to go, adam!
All I can say having tried and tried and tried to at least get the debate to a level higher than she is a drip in a too small dress, and having failed miserably, is that I hope she wins, and proves to be an excellent member. No matter how good she is she wont have the factional support (I’m assuming as an outside entrant) to make cabinet so that can’t be a test for her.
jasmine_Anadyr What about Garrett and McKew, will they get to cabinet?
Adam: I’ve voted Labor all my life, in every single election(federal, state, local), and I’ll certainly be voting for Kevin Rudd/my local Labor candidate in Berowra.
I don’t think I deserved the verbal barrage from you, but that’s your perogative! I’ll take it on the chin, and move on.
Being a Labor supporter doesn’t mean you can’t be critical of a Labor candidate.
I’ve lived in Boothby for 30 years and most of my contacts are Labor voters in professions such as teaching. Almost unanimously they were appalled by Cornes’ selection as a candidate and are agonising about whether they can bring themselves to vote for her. They regard her selection as an insult, and they perceive her as having values a million miles from theirs. Women seem to feel particularly strongly. At best, they will vote for the Green candidate and direct their preferences to Labor. Personally I’d vote for Paris Hilton in order to get rid of the Howard government, but a lot of people – perhaps to their credit – can’t stomach voting for a candidate they don’t respect.
I tend to agree with the line “that at least she is in it to get rid of Howard” however i don’t like candidates who suddenly appear on the horizon.. without saying Maxine Mckew and Peter Garrett are exceptions because they have a bit of intelligence..
Candidates like Nicole worry me because they may be an embarrassment for the party in an election campaign and that is something Labor does not need.
Strange logic that you vote ALP to get rid of John Howard. There are alternatives to the ALP that will also assist in removing John Howard, some of which are attractive.
The best option is to vote Democrats who are legislators not simply negative protestors, then preference the Greens or the insipid ALP, or even Family First.
Make your vote support a prosperous, educated and healthy Australia that’s fair to everyone, with an excellent environment and a genourous attitude internationally – not simply for a different PM, as attractive as that prospect is in the short term.
I’m with you jasmine.
Whatever Ms Cornes strengths or otherwise I have no doubt she would not be portrayed in the negative manner that is current if she were a male.
She would be treated negatively because she bungled her first set of questions, she would be treated negatively because the Advertiser is part of the Murdoch empire and she is being treated negatively because they have portrayed her as conforming to a negative female stereotype.
Wont McKew be born with a faction? I would suspect so and Adam will be able to tell us. I don’t know what Garrett has done for a factional support base but he seems to have some early positioning advantages that Ms Cornes lacks. Like he starts the game as one of the boys.
Paul, since we are talking about Boothby how do you equate the 16.9% loss of primary vote for the Dems at the last election.
The Democrats are a spent force, they could not figure out if they were Arthur of Martha.
Paul Kavanagh, although I am not a Democrats supporter.. (Remember G.S.T) your ditty is very much true.. Changing leaders seems at present much the go here and what lies behind the leaders what policies differentiate them.. and that at this stage i don’t know exactly other than a mangled IR policy from labor and perhaps the Iraq war and some Climate change policies but not much else….to help struggling Austrlian households
Fred (58), no doubt there are some sexist attitudes out there, but they aren’t the main issue. The people I’ve referred to would be extremely happy to vote for young women such as Mia Hanshin, Chloe Fox or Kate Ellis because they respect them and share their values. They don’t respect Nicole Cornes.
I agree with the sexist logic… about Cornes and her treatment.. on that score I will suggest that Labor dump Steve Conroy because that guy is an absolute dud…..
According to this week’s Bulletin, McKew and Garrett are both independents.
The S.A. party is run by The Machine, an alliance between the left and the right. Cornes was selected by an agreement between Don Farrell (leader of the right SDA, and soon to be Senator) and Mark Butler (leader of the left LHMWU, and new member for Port Adelaide after the election.
Head office can nominate anyone they like for seats that aren’t considered marginal, so Premier Rann, treasurer Foley, Butler and Farrell got together and agreed on Nicole Cornes for Boothby, and Mia Handshin for Sturt.
Should have realised it was just like everywhere else, local members don’t get a say.. Don’t know why they help the candidates at election times? What are members good for…
Should have also realised that grubby SDA was in on it… This is the group i have heard that has some deal with Big Supermarket Chains concerning competition in the retail industry and the lack of it.. allegedly evolves around not opening up industry to competition so that the members of the union from the supermarkets can be looked after…
@ 45 ruawake Says:
Are you kidding? After all that footage of him with no pants on chasing little kiddies?
At least you know he’s never going to say the wrong thing.
The union for supermarkets needs to be working harder to ensure its girls and boys aren’t being slaughtered by workchoices.
They do, but only for marginal seats.
McKew and Garrett do have the advantage of having spent decades in the public eye impressing the perceptive with their intelligence and analysis (McKew) or advocacy (Garrett).
# 70
I agree but what about supermarket prices, we all get slaughtered by those… and who maybe benefiting a union doing little because it is getting a handout from members who work in them…
The Machine is just another way of saying the factions have had their day.
But he is a John Howard Supporter, there’s a picture on Humphrey’s website which proves it
And I have posted it before but here it is as a reminder:
http://www.humphreybear.com/images/hbb_gall12.gif
@ 72 ‘intelligence’ should be read as applying to both McKew and Garrett.
Apologies for the bad grammar thing.
Sure, but don’t the factions usually compete against each other? In S.A. they seem to strive for consensus agreement. Apparently that has been the case in S.A. Labor going back to the 1960s.
Now i get it the talent goes to the marginal seats in a contest and the untalented the safe seats such as Corio and Gellibrand… Always thought Shorten was a dud…
So Frank @ 75, we’re agreed that Mr Bear would be an appalling celebrity candidate for the ALP in Boothby?
He’d stand a 50/50 chance of loosing the seat despite what is likely to be a 1-in-100 years swing to Labor.
#75
So Frank at least I know which one is human inside.
John
I rememer the SAS 10 Christmas tape when the contents of Humphrey were revealed to all. She was wearing a little less than HBB.
“The union for supermarkets needs to be working harder to ensure its girls and boys aren’t being slaughtered by workchoices.”
That union would be the SDA. Of course like MOST unions they serve very little purpose.
Just heard Penny Wong on PM defending Nicole Cornes, following some snippet from the earlier interview. Unfortunately, Nicole did sound as though she had only a minimal grasp of Labor’s IR policy; she sounded quite anxious. Penny Wong, on the other hand, handled the interview with great skill; clearly a superior performer.
ShowsOn: I think the situation is more that the role of the factions in SA diminished earlier, symbolised by the prominence of the Centre Left. I think that is the significance of these ‘celebrity’ candidates, they rob the factions power of pre-selection one of the most important holds they have. The appointment (and likely promotion) of Garrett is a sign of the weakness of the Left faction, in my view. These lot owe more to the leadership than to factions for their survival. Rudd is creating his own ‘faction’ above the traditional power-brokers.
Penny Wong is an excellent performer. But I would not underestimate the effectiveness of Cornes ‘ordinariness’. I think there is a lot of anti-professional politician sentiment out there.
82# Thommo
Although i may have sounded anti union this is quite the contrary… i am anti SDA… The shoppies who within the Labor Party have a quite a right wing agenda… concerning abortion, enthuanasia, and stem cell research and for those members of the union such an agenda seems quite innocuous…
Marky, unions are supposed to stand up for their members, that’s what they’re for. The poor old SDA can’t win – they get slagged for not protecting their members and now you slag them when they try to. Typical of the extreme left.
‘Rudd is creating his own ‘faction’ above the traditional power-brokers’.
But will Rudd do anything about the power brokers… i highly doubt it… the machine will see to him if he does…
Adam what does abortion, enthusasia and other such views have to do with helping their members?
Besides Adam all of what i have mentioned came from a member of the right- Mark Latham and i am extreme lefty… no what i want is a party doing things for its supporters..and enacting policy which is traditionally Labor, sorry Adam it is people like yourself that is sending the party to the extreme right.
Marky, I don’t agree with the SDA on those issues. But you were attacking them for negotiating with the supermarkers to strike a deal in the interests of their members. That I will defend, because that’s what unions are supposed to do – work within the industrial and political system to protect their members. I don’t agree with many of the “left” political positions taken by the ETU or the CFMEU either, but I acknowledge they are good unions in terms of fighting for their members.
I thought it was a joke that Senator Kirk lost her pre-selection because she didn’t vote for Beazley. Having said that, she was offered pre-selection for Boothby as a consolation prize.
What I don’t understand is that now the factions aren’t even really ideological. They are more based around personalities and personal alliances.
Can’t believe the vitriol poured on Nicole Cornes by alleged Labor supporters. Former critics who meet her are invariably won over.
Adam
i have nothing wrong with unions negotiating deals and agree that is what they should do… totally agree… but i allegedly made reference to no deal concerning working people it was about retail competition policy… and supposedly the lack of it so that members of the union who work in two big supermarkets can be protected… if this is about helping workers than sorry i have issues… why no competition in the supermarket industry … Cheers..
Just heard Nicole make a goose of herself.. as i said she may lose more votes than gain for the ALP due to her stumbles…her gaffe was embarrassing and although they point has been made “good on her” i think she has bit of the Mal Meningas’ about her in that she has no idea about politics…
@ 93 Phil Robins Says:
Here’s hoping she can meet enough of her would-be constituents to win her seat.
I think what everyone here seems to be saying is that the pre-selection of Mrs Cornes is a plus for Labor, just as long as you don’t have to be represented by her
Whats’ best for Nicole Cornes and the ALP, stay away from interviews nicole.. radio, television, newspapers and local and you may have a chance… sorry not to seen as sexist instead take every photo opportunity you can that way you may have chance…
RE Boothby
Labor to win this seat would need the best vote they have had in SA federally for 30 plus years……. but never the less It appears very likely
Labor will poll very well in SA maybe a 10% plus swing is the opinion
polls are correct… the info in this site suggests so
If that is indeed true then this seat will not defy the swing… irrespective
of the candidate….. I suggest the current MPS for Hughes and Lindsay
are less than outstanding but never the less they were popular till
at least the last election
I think we have exhausted this topic. William can we have a thread to beat up on Danna Vale, or Alex Hawke?
for all the ignorati
1.women didnt have the vote till
1893 nz
1894 south aust.
2.so nicole is representing a fine tradition
all the alpha males should get a hairy dog up themselves and learn a
bit of HISTORY
3.to further enlighten the ignorati read
“My Story-Suffragette the diary of dollie baxter london 1909-1913″
It is an interesting poll in that it indicates quite a lot of voters literally changing sides. 9% of Libs deserting to Labor, 7% of Labor voters deserting to the Libs. Perhaps they are all just parking their votes?
As an ALP member I was a little dismayed at the initial Cornes press conference, but did note her apparent absence of guile.
The poll clearly suggests that her problem won’t be in picking up enough votes off the Libs, it will be holding onto the Labor constituency at the same time. Now that is something that Labor should be able to do something about.
If Nicole can steal 9% from the Libs (albeit only to lose similar Labor support) in Boothby, then I would anticipate that it must be very close in nearby Sturt.
I thought that monthly article explaining how he became the president of the Young Liberals was hilarious. Apparently he acheived it by persuading a Tasmanian Young Liberal who was previously a member of the Greens to vote for him, instead of the moderate candidate!
I agree with Ed the Pseph’s way of looking at this. She is intended to erode into the blue ribbon Liberal voters in the hills and Brighton. Having an ex-Lib may upset traditional Labor supporters but where else will their preferences go? It’s Rudd and Rann all over.
Adam Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
This is all a lot of tosh. Once the campaign starts everyone will focus on the national campaign and the party leaders, and in suburban seats local candidate factors won’t matter very much. If there is a big swing on across Adelaide, Boothby will go with the flow, whether the ALP candidate is good, bad or clinically dead.
Adam that might be correct in other seats but Boothby will vote for the candidate. Southcott will win
Mick Quinlivan Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Labor will poll very well in SA maybe a 10% plus swing
It wont be that much more like 4-5%
So Bill other than being a woman (I have to say it give me a break) WHY will the voters of Boothby vote against Ms Cornes? Now we are talking collectively so if you think they will vote against her because of clothing or because she has the right / wrong male owner then you can say so and we will never think you are sexist – just that you think they are sexist.
Does that make sense?
I am genuinely interested in some analysis at a higher level that ’she is a drip’. And for the record I was involved with a situation where I was asked if a candidate of a certain ethnic background had a lesser chance than a candidate not of a certain ethnic background – and my answer was yes. Kind of because I’m stupid I wanted to run the candidate …. but … I’m just trying to depersonalise the discussion. I get you all hate her and don’t want her elected I’d like to know why.
Jasmine I don’t hate her 1. i have never met her 2. never read anything she wrote 3. never heard her being interviewed 4. Hate is a bad word to use.
What i am hearing is that voters i know in the area are not impressed with either candidate so better to stick to the devil u know.
jasmine_Anadyr Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
I get you all hate her and don’t want her elected I’d like to know why.
Thats true i dont want to see her elected and not Southcott either. It has to be Green!
But and Adam will cringe at least Cornes lives in the electorate not moves in at the last minute.
But Bill, you’re tipping a Howard win too, against the odds.
What will be important in boothby for either candidate is the Green prefs currently at 9 % but i would expect it to be allot higher than that as Jodi is a great candidate. FF will not poll well here so Cornes could loose it due to the apparent FF/ALP right wing conservative deal. Now wouldn’t that be a pity
Gary Bruce Says:
September 26th, 2007 at 9:38 pm
But Bill, you’re tipping a Howard win too, against the odds.
yes i am and i think the recent polls in WA would be of concern to the ALP like i wrote before the party is not as confident as the bloggers on here are
A couple of observations:
There were quite a number of blog contributors who, at the time, aired misgivings about Maxine McKew’s pre-selection. It seems like a stroke of genius now.
Re. Nicole Cornes, is there any other example of a candidate in a seat with a 5%+ margin drawing this level of criticism (both MSM and blogs) especially from people who are outside their electorate and frequently outside their State. That’s certainly the sense in which I agree with the indefatigable Jasmine.
In an ideal world, we have multiple accomplished, idealistic contenders for pre-selection, so that we can choose the one who is best qualified, which might mean ideologically-reliable, knowledgeable on policy, committed to representing the electorate etc.. However, if the seat is valued, it’s almost invariably the one who is best connected with the people who run the party who wins in the real-life game; unfortunate but true.
The cynic’s trick with pre-selection is surely to choose some-one who can induce the other side’s voters to switch. For the most part in safe to reasonably safe seats held by the opposing party, it scarcely matters – and it’s extremely difficult to find a sacrificial lamb to take on the task.
In the once in a blue moon year (for Labor 1969, 1983 and probably 2007; for non-Labor 1966, 1975, 1996) some sacrificial lambs get lucky, so it’s best to ensure that they don’t make too much of a hash of things when they are elected. Andrew Jones Adelaide 1966-69 is my favourite example of a warning to parties; but it’s not the duds who can be hidden in the parliamentary party who constitute a serious problem, but the loose cannon who can’t be controlled. I see very little evidence that Ms. Cornes is a threat in that sense, and I agree with those who believe that her success will depend on how the SA swing holds up. I’d be willing to wager that she will be within +/-1% of the state-wide swing.
And i believe that Sarah Hanson Young will win the last senate seat in SA due to the fact that left unions will not support the Religious right.
Bill, the recent poll in WA was for the state government. Are you saying people will just vote the way they do state as they do federally? All of the other parts of that poll, premiers satisfaction rating etc. were very much in carpenter’s favour.
Also the party is never going to be confident after what they have gone through in the past. That means little. The statistical data means more.
If the ALP is going to win it will be on Green prefs in the 2nd tier marginals and it seems that the ALP are willing to loose those seats and marry FF
I think that Labor should go on the front foot with supporting both Nicole’s natural and political strengths. Put some resources into positive tv exposure for her. That is IF they really are serious about Boothby.
This is one seat that the right pitch and money spent in the right way should buy in the next few weeks, particularly with this candidate. Why should she be forced to pretend to detailed knowledge of policy that she has absolutely no background in? Better to Get real. Better that she bats that one away straight out (as she did indeed try to do in that ‘infamous’ first interview) but spruik more of why she ’switched camps’ and what kind of Australia she’d like to see. And she should insist on that.
Despite the cringe factor of her answering questions that are out of her area, I haven’t seen anything to suggest that she wouldn’t be a good local member in the traditional sense. Reports suggest that she is personable and wins people over when she meets them. A touch even of ‘Simon the likeable’?
An ad with her and someone like Maxine McKew discussing why they are standing for Labor and how they would like Australia to become might be the way to go.
If the poll is right Nicole has been very poorly marketed so far, particularly to Labor people in Boothby.
Maybe a focus group told them that Boothby was unwinnable but putting Cornes there would help Handshin in Sturt and the other marginal candidates over the line?
Something doesn’t add up for mine.
Bill I’m feeling you have a ever so gentle leaning to the greens (nothing wrong with leanings at times some have thought they could see a slant in my completely unbiased and uneditted body of not-work here).
Agree with you regarding candidates from the seat, but Adam, the parties and the voters don’t agree with us Bill. I am also in the would rather lose than get into bed with FF camp, but again the parties and electorate seem to disagree with us.
And hate is a strong word and when I said all I meant all excluding those not wanting to be in that collective (so arguably two bad word choices but who is counting that is possum’s job) but you theory comes back to people not want to change from the Liberal Devil to the Labor Devil. You could be right but 9 months of polling says people are certainly thinking about changing devils.
Thanks for the answer and for not being too cruel about my word choices. And I soooo got away with the whole ‘male owner’ reference … ahhhh sweet.
Just endorsing ruawake (#49) pointing to the football connection with the GetUp! advert to be run during AFL Grand Final – see here.
Peter
I agree with your comments re Nicole,they must be worried about her for the level of criticism and attention she is getting.
Partly may be because maybe they feel she should be a liberal candidate, she has admitted voting liberal in the past, has run her own succesful small business, has completed tertiary education, her law degree, is a newspaper columnist, is good looking and intelligent, has a young family and is not a union official.
One reason the libs hated and still hate Gough so much is that they feel he betrayed his class by running for labor, could be some of the same here.
And thanks William for the school of psephology you have created here.
Those slagging off Cornes should be directing their criticism at the ALP decisionmakers who seem to have developed a fascination with celebrity candidates. I haven’t seen any evidence that celebrity candidates have any positive influence on the vote – or any history of them making any significant contribution to Parliament – at best, some have been capable. However, let’s assume Ms Cornes has good intentions at least.
Based on the relative accuracy of past Advertiser polls, Nicole would have to have everything going for her including margin of error in her favour and the vast majority of preferences directed her way. Her primary seems to be too low to edge past Southcott. She may however appeal to younger voters both male and female although the poll seems to discount this, particularly the female vote.
Please people, can we understand that the verb is ‘lose’, not loose. Loose is what your bowels are when you’ve got Delhi belly, lose is what you do when you haven’t won, or when you’ve ‘lost it’.
cheers,
Alan H
Winston
Typically the criticism at labor candidates will try and pick on any percieved weak spot.
Like Hefferman did with Gillard accusing her of being deliberately barren. Cornes has two kids, so they can’t use this against her.
Another favourite is having a union past, can’t use this on Cornes.
Or being out of touch with the community, Cornes is born and bred in Boothby, worked in aged care during her school years and later in radio and newspaper.
Or has no real understanding of the real world, Cornes ran a succesful small business and has completed a law degree.
All the libs have left is the personal attack, this is going to be a very dirty campaign.
I love Bill’s assertion that since the ALP are doing a preference deal with Family First that Greens voters will get their revenge by voting for the Coalition.
Sorry if I missed it but who conducted the Advertiser poll?
#
1 Dave S Says:
122 Arbie Jay Says:
Somebody has the wrong end of the stick, bimbo’s don’t complete law degrees.
Back to psephology
These stories about Grey had better be true, because it has 108 booths and these maps have taken me two days to make.
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/2007seats/grey.shtml
Note the very large 2004 swings to the Libs in the booths in Whyalla, Port Pirie, Port Augusta, Iron Knob and the Little Cornwall towns, all centres of mining and smelting. The provincial working class obviously didn’t like Latham at all. So there certainly is potential for a big swing back in these areas. But even in 2001, the Lib majority was 10.6%, so it will take more than bringing back the Latham defectors even to bring this seat within range.
Call the election please says “completed a law degree”.
That is just what we need another lawyer..
By the way folks Tony Jones had a reason to get out bed today… and at least tonight i don’t have to use the remote…
I was actually a Cornes sceptic, have met her and she completely dispelled all my preconceptions, and seems by all accounts very personable, and above all very ‘average’ (in the sense of being like everyone else). The ironic thing was that someone in this blog said they respect Chloe Fox, Kate Ellis and Mia Handshin and would vote for them because they have more in common with them and share their values. Ironically I think Cornes has more in common with most ‘average’ people than all these women, being a mum, life experience, small business etc. Take away the ‘footballers wife’ cringe factor and I think that ironically its her averageness that puts people off. People want someone ‘better’ than themselves to represent them, not ‘one of them’ and in this sense the three aforementioned candidates are more marketable.
One wonders exactly what kind of Labor candidate would meet with Marky’s approval. Che Guevara? Rosa Luxemberg? Louis Althusser? The Baader-Meinhoff Gang?
Adam (134) – no, Marky would still argue they’d sold out!
Charles
As I said when theycan’t go the candidate on their abilities they get personal, with Cornes it is trying to paint her as a blonde bimbo, same as Hefferman does with Gillard accusing her of being deliberately barren. Tony is right Cornes makes a good impression on those she meets and her opponent Soutcott is on the Work place committee, a fervant suporter of Work Choices and a denier, like Howard of any housing affordability crisis. The libs would not be getting personal with Cornes if they didn’t think Southcott was under threat.
Adam
I’d guess the Latham factor in Grey was probably about 3%, add this and the 5% who will swing because of Work Choices, 2% because of the drought, water crisis and climate change and the libs inability to cope with it and other crisises , 1% because of equine flu and another lack of response to this crisis they caused, and 2% for the housing affordability crisis that Howard denies and you can see why the libs are worried about Grey.
Yeah If I had a baseball bat I’d be giving a few whacks to those ‘Labor’ people deserting Nicole Cornes on my way past to do my duty at the polling booth. Figurately speaking of course.
The poll suggests she has taken 9% of Southcott’s previous voters. Are some ‘Labor’ people so appalled to be in the company of this fickle 9% that they’d rather the Coalition was returned? They should give her a medal!
A win for Howard will mean a mandate for nuclear power, denial of climate change, more cruel treatment of minorities and refugees, endorsement of further workchoices type stuff and further aggressive foreign policy misadventures as well as undoubted endorsement for himself and his values as PM.
Cornes is representative of a broad aspirational, but essentally working class who have not been particularly political previously. Seems a few of them do not want to mandate these things to Howard if asked and presented with a reasonable alternative. Good on them!
And we all know this is very tight when it comes to the seat count, despite the reportedly likely slashed margins in several safe Lib seats.
Get your act together ALP machine on this one, or you’ll waste a good opportunity. Every potential seat is precious and must be fought for.
Nicole Cornes is getting free publicity that you dream about. How many people know who was the Labor candidate that ran last time. Sure she might make a few verbal slip ups. But most reasonable people and this does not include the media, rusted on Liberal supporters or half the blogocracy will cut her some slack.
One thing is for sure, the locals will know her name come polling day and that is much of the battle when you are fighting an incumbent.
I wonder what negative story the MSM will run about Rudd and/or Labor tomorrow. It’s becoming a daily ritual.
Meanwhile Adam back in the real world chief executives earn millons each year whilst working people get the crumbs… will anything change under Labor.. perhaps we can find a few more public assets to flog off and let the rich buy the shares… Yep i can remember when Labor was last in power Commonwealth Bank what has this provided for working people… Telecommunications competition… Tariffs reductions, Qantas sale and a string of failed airlines later.. part-time and casual employment all begun under Labor… Putting people in detention centres wonder who started this policy…
Yep Adam i maybe left but what i will standing up for is working people and the poor not unlike you another of those New Labor people who are false conscious.
So Marky Marky, you’ll be voting for? Are you one of those Labor people who would rather see a conservative government than a “watered down conservative government”? Personally, the more watered down the better but still I’ll take the watered down version any day rather than vote this lot back in.
Marky will be voting for Alex Hawke, same as he did at the Young Liberals convention in Hobart.
Sounds like a cross between a Green and a Socialist alliance voter to me
Holy crap! Did others see all the campaign material the Liberals are delivering in Bennelong? That’s where all the money that was going to be spent on N.S.W. marginal seats is going.
I want a government who actually believes in things.
I will be voting Labor of course.. .but do you all of actually believe they will make this country a better place to live. Or does Rupert Murdoch tell you all how to think.
Amazing isn’t it we have a Labor Government in Victoria and people sit on trolleys in hospitals…
And by the way Hugo by not believing in what Labor once stood means you sold out not me.
Gary,
The Channel 9 Late News tried to make something of Rudd’s statement that no shadow minister is guaranteed the job in Government, if Labor wins. This was apparently in response to a question about whether Swan would be treasurer and a speculation that Julia might want Treasury.
It sounds like the egg-beater at work, and just an attempt to keep the hubris tale running – “measuring up the curtains”, “arguing over the speakership” etc. etc.
Cornes gave the Libs and the media plenty of ammunition with that first interview a few months ago. It’s not entirely fair but it’s life – politics is a game where first impressions count for a lot.
Her interview this morning sounded terrible as well, I thought.
I reckon she’ll get five points less than the overall SA swing. So she’ll only win if the overall swing is massive.
All the Labor heavyweights saying today what a great job she’s doing – bet that’s not what’s being said in private!
Paul @ 60,
I think most of those who are voting to get rid of Howard really are doing it for more than just literally getting rid of him, even if they frame it in those words. Most people who hate Howard, hate him because of what he represents, and the things that he has done or tried to do.
However, the only way to change government is to vote for Labor. (& i’m talking lower house here of course, since the government is not decided in the Senate). Should a Democrat be elected to the lower house and they had the deciding vote on who would form government, who would they pick? While they would probably support Labor, I’m not aware of any statement by the democrats on this, and even if there was, since Democrats don’t enforce the party line, even for their own policy (eg GST), there is no way to be sure who a vote for the democrats would be for.
Of course this is all academic, since the Dems don’t have a snowflakes chance in hell of winning a lower house seat (I’m doubtful they will even get a Senate spot), and thus if you vote for the Dems, what matters is who you preference.
Yep they should support her or find an equally unbelievable candidate to parachute in their at the last minute. My advice would be to opt for the former and go for broke.
Dyno Cornes is a product of the Labor machine gone wrong… and yes behind the scenes they will be saying that… but of course you want get that from people such as Hugo or Adam who are the yes men of the party. Products of a factional malaise within a party of which about 20% of its members (those in factions) dominant. Democracy in action (inaction).
Contrary to all this i do think that Maxine McKew is an excellent choice as a candidate… and will divert Howards attention during the campaign from campaigning in other areas the coalition needs to win.
#126 another one that`s been getting to me lately is the `shoe-in`(sic). The correct spelling is `shoo-in`, and the term has nothing to do with putting in the slipper. Ah, that feels better.
Yes, MM is an inspired choice by Labor.
I think Howard will keep Bennelong but the fight for it is a massive drag on his energy and time.
Also, paul @ 60, for what its worth I think the democrats don’t have a bad record in parliament, with a few exceptions.
However i think they are a spent force now; I think they alienated a lot of their supporters with the gst, the infighting of meg vs natasha, and then all the leadership woes afterwards.
Having a government majority in the senate, ironically, has also hurt both the democrats and the greens because they have not been able to get the attention of the media and public by helping block or win substantial concessions on major legislation, which was possible when they had the balance of power.
#131 Mmm, the large Iron Knob swing to the Libs is obviously something Antony Green will have to incorporate into his Nantucket Sleigh Ride analysis.
well you know what they say about swinging iron knobs and certain lib ministers…
hehehehe
*hides*
McKew should be an effective parlamentary secratary to start with. Later on she will be a minister. But that is only if Labor win seats like Bennelong and Boothby.
If MM wins Bennelong, she will become the Minister for Beating Howard. She will be feted across the country as the Blessed Max. Men will swoon and women will curtsy in her presence.
Further to gusface’ comment about when women got the vote.
My mum was given the right to vote in SA’s upper house, the Legislative Council for the first time in her life, and the same for many thousands, mabe hundreds of thousands of other SA women, when she was about 50 years old.
Back in the late 60s or maybe early 70s.
Until then there was a property condition on the right to vote in the Upper House which few women had in that era.
Some shenanigans by Donny Dunstan, bless him, got rid of the requirement and she got her right thanks to him.
I’m sure some here will be more au fait with the details.
On Advertiser Polls,
Does anyone know if they apply weighting to their data. I don’t recall seeing it stated anywhere that they did, when i think most of the other pollsters explicitly state this.
If they don’t apply some weighting to their data, it would be likely that their margin of error would be more than expected.
Must chip in. From the electorate of Boothby. Despite my still simmering outrage over Mick Keelty, William. Thanks for tempering.
The Advertiser poll lacks credibility, goodness knows what model was used. Mike Rann pointed to a similar Advertiser poll three days prior in a State election, which was totally opposite to the actual landslide result for Labor in Vinnie Cicarello’s seat of Norwood.
Notwithstanding, Nicole was totally at sea on radio this morning in her knowledge of Labor’s IR policy, I am sad to acknowledge. She copped a talkback hammering as a result, even from Labor oriented callers. My sister, as I have said, the notorious swinging voter, likes her, but also commented she thought Nicole an ‘airhead.’
The radio interviewer, Matt Abraham, was gentle with Nicole, to his credit. He could have gone in very hard, as he has with the very high profile, such as Mark Latham.
I was initially outraged at the choice of Nicole especially over another hardworking candidate. Thanks, Kevin Foley.
Nicole’s profile despite this questionable poll, has improved. I thought that her initial ignorance of anything political, leaving aside Labor, would have been sharpened. Apparently not.
Still, as we all know, the polls narrow once the campaign starts. SMILE.
A separate observation.
Chloe Fox, the now State member for Bright, was unsuccessful in an earlier attempt at Boothby. Had Chloe been the current candidate for Boothby, would have romped it in. Will do so, beyond this Federal election. I have no doubt Chloe will run.
#160: “The statistically weighted phone poll of 649 electors”
So yes it is.
Dear peoples, you / we have now spent a whole day arguing about one candidate in a not-especially-vital seat, a seat which will in any case, I maintain, go with whatever swing there is across metro Adelaide regardless of who the candidate is, as suburban seats nearly always do. Can we get back to something important tomorrow?
The bottom line in Boothby is that it is the ALP who are the disgrace, not Nicole Cornes. She may very well be a bimbo, I really have no idea, but the way the ALP handled the situation left her with little chance of creating any other public image.
First they ask her to be a candidate and give her just 24 hours to reply, despite the fact that she was completely unfamiliar with any ALP policy and had no political background. Then the very next day after she agreed she was whisked away to the ALP national conference. Then the morning after that she is left to fend for herself at a press conference with nobody from the ALP in sight to help her out.
Would it really have been that hard to ask her 2 months earlier, keep it on the quiet, and then announce it once she has had time to brief up on policy? I really don’t get what the ALP were thinking when they handled it so abysmally.
Re 140,
The Australian has an article this morning discussing how “Rudd refuses to guarantee anyone their seats should Labor win the election”. Trying to play shadow front benchers off against each other I guess.
Where’s Matt Price?
151
marky marky says: The left is the true path, using more words.
Marky you should take a long hard look at the Liberal party after this election. That is what happens to a political party when those that believe there is only one true path get control.
Labor will win this election because they have moved to the center. Gillard is from the left, Gillard will have some say in future policy.
In my view the Rudd/Gillard team was a brilliant move, it shows people of different political bent can come together to get things done.
The hard right have taken control of the Liberal party, for them it’s the opposition bench, if the hard left got control of the Labor party there would be room for a central party to from ( the democrats could get their act together) and it would be the opposition bench for Labor and Liberal.
We are a democracy, a true path isn’t worth jack unless 50% of the voters agree.
Charles,
well said. Although i do note that Marky Marky has made some important points about where Labor is headed overall. His earlier comments about the SDA certainly had some truth to them. I’ve known people who have been SDA members and got royally screwed – the union did a deal with the company which resulted in bugger all gains for the workers, but increased membership for the union – of course, the more members they have, the more chance they get to act like Mel Gibson at ALP National Conference. I loathe ther factional divisions of the ALP and i especially loathe the hateful little people that support them. You can’t even have a discussion with these nasty little pieces of work as they get so worked up about their precious faction – totally blinkered! A good example would be the spray i received from James yesterday when i questioned the campaign of ALP Right Faction Candidate for Isaacs, Mark Dreyfus – you should have seen the vitriol – it was a legitimate set of points met with the fanatic bile that only a true factional die hard (left or right) can produce. If and when the ALPs conservative opponents are defeated, the next fight will be among the factions and i fear it won’t be pretty at all.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22490484-29277,00.html
Completely not Bootheby related, but according to the link Dr Karl will run for the Senate for the Climate Change Coalition.
Don’t worry, Possum will be along with another cubic time series soon
Apparently Howard (already hard-right, or is that hard-self) is too left for the new future of the Liberal party as the extreme right take over and try preselecting their science experiments. God save Australia should Howard win this election – it will be delivered right into the hands of real neo-cons loonies.
Ed the pseph @ 151,
Why should McKew necessarily have to wait to become a Minister? She might not have been in Parliament before, but she has more experience of the workings of power in Canberra than perhaps any Labor frontbenchers except McMullan and Crean. She’d be an asset in Cabinet, and I’d promote her, along with Combet, straight in.
i was driving home from work yesterday and heard the ALP candidate for boothby on the radio – i literally cringed, and almost crashed the car. same with the news last night – i had to mute the telly and could only watch her interview through a slit.
is it too late for the ALP to dump her/find someone else?
172 Charlie Says: September 27th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Telecommunications and the arts minister?
What portfolio looks after the ABC? Because if Labor wins, and McKew gets in, she should get that job and her first job would be to clear out the board of the ABC, namely Janet. *evil grin*
Uncle Joe is saying he would love to be on a AWA. He is also saying young people these days have the skills to negotiate with their boss. He likens it to the fact they can negotiate to get mobile phones contracts valued about a $1000, or they can get a car loan or to go overseas. How is that the same as having to go to your boss, and in big business it could be 3 or 4 up managers who get the final decision, and asking for a payrise or negotiate changes to their work conditions and hope that the boss does right by the employee?
Negotiating a mobile phone contract, a car loan or a loan for going overseas doesn’t put at risk a happy working environment. Not getting a phone or a car loan isn’t going to be the end of the world, but being on the wrong side of the boss can be, even to the point they may not give a good reference when applying for another position.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Young-people-capable-of-IR-deals-Hockey/2007/09/27/1190486444315.html
Do the ALP have a position on restoring the staff rep to the ABC board?
What did they say about it at the time?
There might be some sensitivity about a former ABC employee becoming Communications Minister, but it is a good fit.
It is a Booth-by Booth analysis
Uncle Joe is saying he would love to be on a AWA. He is also saying young people these days have the skills to negotiate with their boss. He likens it to the fact they can negotiate to get mobile phones contracts valued about a $1000, or they can get a car loan or to go overseas
Will 175
And the reality is that most people don’t have much room to move with these contract ‘negotiations’ anyway, they are pretty well all standard form contracts that you take or leave, and can only fiddle around with at the margins.
Unky Joe lives in lala land. Of course he would love to be on an AWA, he is in the small minority of elites (and that is what you are Joe) who actually do have some serious negotiating power with a prospective employer, and a decent range of jobs to choose from in his post-parliamentary career, (which may be sooner than he would like). Not least of all because he will have a very nice parliamentary pension safety net to cushion him from the harsh workplace realities the rest of us have to deal with.
What a palooka.
Mike Rann is a mile in front according to the latest Newspoll. Using the logic of Bill Weller (113), the federal Libs really have something to worry about there.
Optimist @ # 168 said:
“I loathe ther factional divisions of the ALP and i especially loathe the hateful little people that support them.â€
What are factions?
Factions are groping of people who have a similar basis for their thinking. They come together to get support for their plans and to help lobby others to support what they want done. You find them everywhere from political parties to P & C’s. They allow the development of ideas and concepts to be debated and thought out at a level below that of the decision-making body/group. This enables the really silly ideas to be discarded early and for those ideas that have some merit to be developed and improved prior to being brought before the final decision making body.
Whenever you have people coming together to make decisions you will have factions. It is an important of our democracy because it makes it mandatory that before an idea or a concept comes up for decision it will have been through a long process of development and it will have the support of a critical number of the members of the decision making body. This ensures that the time of the decision making body is not waisted on items that have little support.
The two biggest factions we have are the Labor Party and the Liberal Party, both of which has smaller factions. It is also worth noting that the broader a particular body is the more factions you will have.
This does not mean that factions cant have a negative effect if taken too far but to condemn them out of hand is short sighted and denies the natural order of things.
No matter how small or large the group there will always be factions. Some may be permanent as in the Left and Right of the ALP or they may just come together for a particular issue.
If you want to get rid of factions you had better come up with a system that can do the same thing. However, could I suggest that if you feel so strongly about it that instead of this silly attitude of condemning those who belong to a different faction a better plan would be to try and make them work better.
PS
Usually you find that those on the loosing side are the most anti faction faction.
What are you talking about, and who is the “us” you speak on behalf of?
Kev @ 164 – remove “ALP” and insert “Kevin Foley” and I agree wholeheartedly.
The MPs that I know have told me they were totally blindsided by this – it appears that no one knew it was on the cards until it was already in the media. The news that she had been preselected was greeted with general eye-rolling, but as I said earlier, when you actually meet her you find that there’s more substance than you expect.
I still think she’s in with a chance, but a lot of that will depend on the state-wide ALP swing.
Whogivesarats,
that’s a cute Webster’s Dictionary definition of factions. Talk to me when you have a sense of how they really function at party level. If you’re ok with branch stacking as a central component of democracy – good luck to ya.
Optimist (184) – it’s a tad glib, is it not, to equate factions with branch stacking – it’s like saying that some armies have committed war crimes, so therefore all armies are evil. It’s a shame, as your posts are normally well-thought out, but in this case you are going in hard on a popular misconception. It is, in short, a facile argument. The alternative to “factions” (and WhoGivesARats @181 is correct in pointing out that factions don’t only occur in political parties) is where everyone argues their own position. That might be more democratic, but I can’t see much ever getting done under that scenario.
Of course factions can be pernicious, but they also provide much-needed stability to “broad-church” political parties.
It’s not really that surprising for a new fringe party, but look how the FF vote from last election has splintered.
Optimist
Thank you for your reply and for you appreciation of my definition of factions. Just for the record that was straight off the top of my head. I hope that if I got the definition from another source I would have acknowledged that source.
One of the problems with factions is that they can give rise is intolerance to other opinions and a tendency to try and belittle others because they disagree with you
The problem that you suggested was attributed to factions is just a little misleading in that branch stacking is usually the result of personal ambition. As an example of this is the problems the Liberal Party had in the electoral division of Cooke in southern Sydney. However, it is true that that in this case one particular candidate formed his own faction to support his ambition. Now what is the problem the faction of the personal ambition?
Hugo,
you’re missing my point. It’s not an either/or situation. The logic you seem to be using dictates that we have factions as they are or not at all – I don’t advocate that position. Futhermore I never equated factions with branch-stacking. I was merely pointing to an obviously undemocratic by-product of the way factions function in the real world of political parties. Thank you for pointing out the fact that factions exist in other aspects of life, but i thought it was obvious that my remarks were referring to the specific impact of factionalism in party politics.
I haven’t suggested that we somehow wave a magic wand and get rid of factions – I am talking about how counterproductive factional rivalry has become in a party environment. Of course, a healthy debate of ideas and opposing views is a good thing, but that is not, in reality how factions work in political parties these days. Does that clarify things a bit or am i still not making sense?
In theory, your last line about stability is correct – in practice, factions are rapidly degenerating into dysfunctional tribes of political savages that will eat each other at the first opportunity…..that, in my opinion is not a recipe for stability at all.
Whogivesarats,
sorry missed that last post. In response, I would say that I’m not sure where you get the idea that Towke’s bid for Baird’s seat was about forming a “faction of personal ambition (?)”
I reject the idea that branch stacking is simply about personal ambition – it is nowhere near that simple. Personal ambition plays a role, but only in the context of a group endeavour – people act in unison with the group (faction) as a result of longer term personal ambition – you seem to suggest that branch stacking only occurs when an ambitious would-be candidate uses some unknown power to enlist the aid of the many people it takes to effectively stack branches. It doesn’t work that way in real life politics.
I’d go on, but i honestly don’t know what to make of the question – “now what is the problem the faction of the personal ambition?”
I’m not having a go, it’s just that there is a typo somewhere in there that has left me confused as to what you mean.
Once everything is focussed on the election, this won’t matter. Once the advertisements start during the grand final, peripheral issues won’t count.
Here is an example of what we can expect.
https://www.getup.org.au/campaign/ClimateCleverer&id=126
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSAKIjna-bA
Run those two ads and it will be all over bar the shouting.
By the way has anyone noticed how fast getup is racking in the money?
WOW!!!!!
That is just one days worth. They did the same yesterday!!!!
marky marky @ 146
Just on the “rich” buy share in the stock market
The rate of share ownership in Australia is one of the highest in world
“That puts Australia’s per capita population of investors just ahead of the United States, where 50 per cent of the population own shares.â€
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1037330.htm
So is over 50% country “richâ€? Because many people i know who buy and sell share are from so called ‘working class “.
I expect the work choices ads to run in the Grand Final as well. The three hot button issues. If they all aren’t someone should be sacked at their respective organisation.
James,
since you’re posting again – could i have a response to our Dreyfus/Isaacs discussion from yetserday?
Did you catch my last comment / question to you?
The difference is of course Labor has to pay for their ads, the government uses our money and justifies by saying “Well, they did it?” Boy, have I heard that excuse many times – from children.
The only way the Labor Party has been able to compete with the Coalition is by appearing to change their stripes…they have elected conservative leaders to combat the centre-right Coalition…
Look at Rudd the most conservative Laborite of them all, look at the State Premiers…Beattie (gone but still was a right winger), Iemma (right winger), Brumby + Bracks (right wingers), Mike Rann (right winger), Alan Carpenter (right winger), Paul Lennon (right winger)…you bag the Coalition for being conservative but it is the ALP who have moved itself to the right to get into power…primarily because the Coalition struggles when it comes up against right wing Labor leaders…
But sneaking beneath the surface is the rabid left of the ALP and when they show their ugly face the ALP get punished and the Libs are back in town…
What hypocrisy from Rudd…oh we dont know who’ll be leader of the Libs they are a shambles and unelectable…then yesterday oh i can’t guarantee any front benchers spots in the event i win, not even the most important one of treasurer…another own goal by Rudd!
Nobody bags the Coalition for being conservative, you imbecile. They bag them for being jackboot extremists.
By the way did anyone see the Alexander Downer Lateline skit done by the Chaser? Absolutely brilliant. Its not on You Tube yet.
Glen. You and the Liberal Party are way out of touch.
stunkrat what you consider extremist is only being conservative or centre-right…god help us if Gillard becomes Treasurer!
Glen you miss an obvious difference. Labor PMs do not choose ministers, that is the job for caucus. So of course Rudd cannot say who ministers will be.
I hope Getup put that ad on during the NRL GF as well. Plenty of votes to be had in the Northeast…
#201 Ruawake
If Gillard is Deputy Leader, she can choose her portfolio in government.
#197 Stunkrat
“jackboot”… another thoughtless reference to fascism.
Why do some people assume Gillard is unpopular? Evidence please.
Rattus Rattus on ABC wireless news hopes – or welcomes – Family First gaining the balance of power in the Senate. These people scare me.
We have evidence Costello is unpopualr. Check some of the polls where his name is mentioned.
She was a communist, then a dedicated socialists, and a massive Union supporter…need i say more she represents a minority of public opinion and yet she could be deputy PM and treasurer…oh and to top it off she’s fugly nuff said!
I think your last comment Glen says more about you than you’d want aired. Not a pretty disposition my friend.
By the way Glen what is bad/wrong with union members again?
Glen,
The traditional left/right factionalism in the ALP has been quite constructive. You have the right in charge of things like economic policy, defence foreign affairs and finance and the left in charge of things like health, education and social policy. Gillard will never be Treasurer because Treasury would always go to someone in the right. And of course all the main ALP leaders have come from the Right. It is the dominant faction.
All parties have factions (come to think of it, so do families, clubs, work places and just about every other form of human co-operation). If you want rampant, destructive factionalism, look at your own Liberal party with David Clarke and the placement of that unelectable idiot Peter Debnam as leader in NSW. There were a lot of people ready to throw out Labor in NSW and they were robbed of the chance by the Liberals internal brawling.
In terms of hypocrisy, the Tele was bagging the ALP for allocating Government jobs, and yet you get cranky because they say they haven’t allocated any jobs to anyone. Catch 22.
Glen
Read a book. Try some poetry. Henry Lawson’s “Faces in the Street” might well be a good start. If you read a big book about politics in Australia, you will find that some of your idols began their political life as so-called radicals. G. Henderson, for example.
William. This is the last time I will bait Glen. Promise.
Are you an oil painting yourself, Glen?
ruawake #201,
just to clarify, the ALP caucus determines who will be on the front bench, but the Leader determines the allocation of portfolios.
Nothing thoughtless about it.
Optimist
You are correct, but with an extra 40 members of caucus after the election the front bench may well be different.
David Charles
I doubt Gillard would choose to be treasurer, Lionel Bowen was deputy PM in the first 3 Hawke Ministries but choose other portfolios.
I once went through the 2004 electorate polls 2PP Labor (x) as reported here and compared them with the final Labor 2PP in the electorate (y).
Result was:
Y = 0.78X + 10.98
R-Sq = 0.65
Wrong. But I’m not surprised.
Glen, if you are going to regurgitate the lines of Sheehan & Bolt you should have a look at what they actually say. Neither of them have accused Gillard of being a communist, just of being involved in an organisation that was in part founded by ex-CPA members.
Derek Corbett @ 205 : more importantly he said he prefers not to have to deal with minor parties, i.e. no checks and balances. The poor Democrats, once the jilted ‘wets’ of the Liberals, and the ones that gave us the GST, are now unwanted by the government and the rest of the electorate.
The bare minimum I want out of this election is for a party like the Greens or Democrats to hold the balance of power in the Senate. I prefer if it was 2 minor parties/individuals to hold the power, that way the government will have some difference of opinions to worry about. With one party/person holding power, they end up being just an extension of the government that’s allowed to voice their opinion now and then.
#214 “Nothing thoughtless about it”
That is sad.
Martin B
Yes she was, doesnt mean she is now but she was or at least had Communist leanings…how could she not have Communist leanings in joining a qasi communist organisation after all its like not being a conservative and joining the Liberal Party…
“Between 1984 and 1986 she worked full-time for Socialist Forum, a group that formed after another schism in the Communist Party of Australia, with the aim of advancing the socialist agenda in Australia. She served as a member of Socialist Forum’s management committee until 1993, well into her career as a lawyer.”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/play … 32033.html
Julia is too young to be a proper communist. Real communists in this country died out years ago. Vale. They handed out from the gutter, not the footpath because police would not allow. The story of McCarthyism in this country has yet to be written.
220 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Yeah… right… We’re all about to be shipped off to gulags because the commies have taken over. Should I sleep with my trusty rifle locked and loaded by the bed?
If this is your biggest criticism of the Gillard, you are seriously SERIOUSLY in trouble.
Your arguments have become laughable. You need to lift your game mate.
Optimist,
Again, thanks for your reply.
Maybe if I put this in very broad terms it will be clearer but please give me some wriggle room. Using a broad brush usually leaves plenty of room for ambiguity.
All organizations have factions some permanent (eg left and right in the Labor Party) some are temporary and some are for particular issue. Some are formalised some are not.
Sometimes the uses of factions are abused eg (the Cook preselection issue) but what is the problem, the concept of a faction or the driving force (eg personal ambition) behind the abuse of the faction. I would say it is the personal ambition that is the problem not the faction. The faction is just the tool being used/abused to drive towards a particular result. To clarify the point you raised in respect of Cook, Towke formed a faction (i.e. those “new members†beholding to him) with the sole purpose of gaining preselection for Cook. This faction (at that stage) had no other purpose but as a vehicle for his personal ambition.
Factions are here to stay and complaining about them does not help for we are all members of factions in all organizations we belong to.
The issue is not that they are bad/good or whatever but how to make them work better.
Everything would be a lot more chaotic and less productive making the running of any organization almost impossible if we did not have factions. Just consider the management meeting of any organization (including business) where factions were not used. This would mean that most of the time would be spent on issues that had no hope of success because there would be no indication of the support any particular issue might get prior to it being considered by the decision making body.
There are basically two reasons for branch stacking as I see it. The first is personal ambition and secondly the thwarting of other faction(s) (both people and ideas). This second reason is also to do with personal ambition in that one wants to be more important, further up the totem poll, than those from the other faction. If you can give me an example of where personal ambition was not involved in this sort of behaviour I would be interested.
However, if the reason for a faction is to support and fight for ideas than I can see no problems. I would contend that in this case factions should be encouraged.
Glen can you please post a link to a recent photo of yourself so that we can judge your contributions by the fact that you are fugly or not!
This is an important criteria according to you.
So if it is good enough for Gillard it should be good enough for all.
Please where is the link to your photo?
Anyone else has inside info on whether Glen is an oil paintig or not. Based on his opinions and contributions thus far, I can only imagine what he looks like – the horror, the horror…
What’s so bad about ‘Tailgunner Joe’ Derek?
Pauline her fugliness does not reduce her ability to do her job…having socialist tendencies does that more than anything! Anyway her public image and her past history will basically reduce her chances of becoming Prime Minister of Australia.
There are no photos of me that i know of on the internet but i can assure you i am far from fugly
I have done a bit research on Glen and this is what I found:
Fugly Glen
“Yes she was, doesnt mean she is now but she was or at least had Communist leanings…how could she not have Communist leanings in joining a qasi communist organisation”
How very McCarthyist of you.
Unfortunately for your little line in propaganda, being a communist means joining the communist party, not associating with ex-communists.
Despite what those freethinking Bolts and Sheehans would have you believe, Socialist Forum was not a “q[u]asi communist organisation”.
Here is a neutral description of the Socialist Forum.
“The Socialist Forum was established in 1984, initially by disaffected members of the Communist Party of Australia (CPA). Its membership included Australian Labor Party (ALP) members and political activists and trade unionists seeking an alternative to the factional constraints of the CPA and the ALP. Socialist Forum’s stated aim was to contribute to the development of democratic socialism in Australia by facilitating discussion and analysis of ideas and experiences; providing education both for members and non-members; and developing links between political activists and organisations of political activists. Socialist Forum became an incorporated association in January 1986. It was not a political party, although there was an attempt by a section of the ALP Victorian Branch to prohibit members of the ALP from joining it. The structure of Socialist Forum was based on a policy setting Annual Conference, an elected Management Committee responsible for administration and financial management, an elected Public Issues Committee responsible for the organisation’s direction between conferences, and Interest Groups for education and information exchange. There were few paid staff members and Socialist Forum relied on subscriptions and donations. Membership was over 200 at its peak, but the level of active membership declined in the mid 1990s. A cost and accommodation sharing arrangement was negotiated between the Evatt Victoria Centre (EVC), the Australian Fabian Society (AFS) and the Socialist Forum in 1997. The EVC was itself an outgrowth of the Sydney based Evatt Foundation and the Victoria Foundation and had ceased to operate in Victoria by the end of the 1990s.”
http://www.lib.unimelb.edu.au/collections/archives/collections/pdfs/socialistforum(102~28).pdf
Glen, it is only the right-wingers on this site that this little fantasy about Gillard becoming ALP leader.
The others here have consistently pointed out that as she comes from the left faction, there is no chance of her being elected leader.
Will @ 218
Your “bare minimum” would do nicely for me, too. But not FF. Cannot bear nutters of any ilk. Grown-ups believing in witchcraft and supernatural goings-on worry me when it comes to setting public policy.
Pauline – that was gold.
Glen @ # 226 refers to “socialist tendencies†and then argues that these tendencies somehow reduce her (M/s Gillard) ability to do her job.
What are “socialist tendencies�
Maybe I could suggest that they are a desire to help people who for whatever reason cant help them selves. That they are a belief that society as a whole has a responsibility to help those who need help.
This being the case I wonder what you would call the current government’s policy of spending billions on the welfare of those on the land who have been devastated by the drought.
Maybe I was mistaken the other day when I say Mr Howard arguing most strenuously for these socialist policies on the TV.
Maybe these “socialist tendencies†of Mr Howard reduce his ability to his job.
Could I be right in that Glen is working against the re-election of Mr Howard?
Well-done Glen there is light at the end of the tunnel.
When the “communist bogie” rears its head you know the conservatives are really struggling. Hell Glen just how old are you?
This Gillard or Swan or Santa for PM or treasurer is a typical strowman argument. Set up a false premise and scare the punters of a non existing crisis/problem/disaster.
This is a red herring and red flag to the bull. And as we know people like Glen have a problem with anything red or left.
So when the commentati our there raise the red flag, Glen and his ultra conservative union/women/worker hating friends go for the kill.
Last time I looked, Howard was PM. There is no election called as we speak. Labor needs to win the election and 16 seats. There are a lot of ifs in there.
And only IF Labor wins Govt, is there a decision to be made who becomes a minister.
So Glen, let’s all get hysterical and charge that red flag now.
But just ask yourself, who is the one in control here, the commentati with the red flag or the bull?
strowman is similar to strawman except misspelled…
Glen,
You’re wasting your time here in trying to convince any of us that Gillard will ever be PM. Everyone here, including you, know she is from the left and the right will never let Gillard or anyone from the left get to be PM.
If you really want to convince people, go to a site that doesn’t have people educated about the runnings of the ALP on it. Go scare them with your ‘Reds under the beds’ theory.
Glen
Just to make you feel good, read:
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=your+say&subclass=general&story_id=1060320&category=opinion
Another classy piece of opinion by Mr Pru. (David Barnett)
Then why did you bring the issue up if it’s totally irrelevant? Do you think bringing up totally irrelevant issues is a sensible way to argue?
Pauline
Looks a bit like Akermaniac on a really bad night. Or is it a grab from a John Howard nightmare? Anyway, ta.
It is common enough for people to change their political positions in one direction or another. What is important about Julia Gillard (or any other politician) is not what her political position used to be but what it is now–and (if it matters) she is plainly not a Communist now.
whogivesarats,
I don’t think we are in any fundamental disagreement. We are talking about two different things. You are talking about an academic understanding of the term faction and i am talking about the reality of how factions function in the major political parties. I’m not saying that it is a matter of getting rid of factions – you seem to be saying that it is either a matter of accepting the way factions are or getting rid of them altogether – actually, what I’m getting at is the need to reform party factions – I would suggest that you do a bit of research on efforts to reform factionalism in the ALP over recent years – you’ll see that the same points i have made, have also been made (rather more precisely and eloquently) by a range of people including Simon Crean, Bob Hawke, Neville Wran and Barry Jones to name a few. Please understand that when i use the word faction, i expect (on this site at least) people to understand that i am talking abuot its meaning in practice, not the precise academic definition – to do that would be, to my mind a pointless exercise in semantics that contributes nothing to the political debate that generally dominates discussions here. I could go on for days about this, but that is because i am well acquainted with the problems that party factionalism causes, especially for the ALP. When you want to talk about concrete examples and the reality of how factionalism works in the parites, come talk to me – otherwise, I thank you for again giving a definition of the term “faction” and we’ll leave it at that.
Pauline 227
Brilliant ….. Brilliant …. brilliant
says it all really
Isn’t it interesting that Gillard is on the agenda and her past (1980?) is suddenly very important? It was flagged weeks and months ago by Rudd and Gillard as well as in the Textor Crosby leaked report that personal attacks on Gillard were coming.
And here they are, right on call!
The MSM and ultra conservative commentati are running the mud all over the place. Except it won’t stick because there is no substance and no story. It is fabricated in some back office liberal dirt unit with the blessing of the GG and the rest of them.
When will they learn that they need to have a story with some facts and real dirt to make the running. This fluff mud piece won’t last the week…
J-D: So true, one couldn’t called Costello nor Murdoch socialists anymore.
Pauline = slander nuff said…
Pauline i made reference to her public image because it is detrimental to her chances of party leadership, but im afraid when you compare the two she doesnt hold a candle to Julie Bishop a potential leader or deputy leader of the Liberals.
Glen, it is you who made fugly a criteria – not me.
So Julie Bishop is better, smarter, cleverer than Gillard because she is not as fugly? Is that what you are saying. Your logic and arguments belong in the Daily Tele, HUN, kindergarden or Parliament.
Pauline i was referring to Bishop’s public image (level of fugliness) being better than Julia Gillards…
They are both lawyers but one is a socialist and one is a free market liberal democrat…you be the judge which you’d want in a powerful position.
Pauline i dont go out of my way to slander people just as a political retort…my remarks about Gillard are centred on her unfavourable public image that she cant seem to shake and because of that no matter what she changes her hair style to her policies stink and her public image isnt much better…
Rudd names top team – if he wins
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/rudd-names-top-team–if-he-wins/2007/09/27/1190486465809.html
Now that the Gillard issue is settled, who would be treasurer IF Howard leaves (if ever) and Costello takes over?
Glen, you’re embarrassing yourself. Change the subject.
Ok how about Rudd having to guarantee that Swan will be the Treasurer after his gaff yesterday…lol…not only is that an own goal because nobody takes Swan seriously or thinks he can manage the economy but Swan hates Rudd and Rudd hates Swan…the perfect marriage lol…
“Pauline i dont go out of my way to slander people just as a political retort…my remarks about Gillard are centred on her unfavourable public image that she cant seem to shake…” Can you prove this statement Glen? I can prove Costello’s unpopularity.
Oh and just for the third time, Glen, what is bad/wrong with union members? You seem to have a thing against them. Unions of course Glen as you understand are made up of every day working people. They are not one person.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/opinion/animations/0,25199,29,00.html
What a classic
:) … their newest animation cartoon 
Glen your description of Rudd and Swan sounds more like Howard – Costello!!! Are you getting confused? Are you projecting???
I am insulted by the comparison.
For one thing, Rudd and Swan are a lot less fugly than the liberal married leadership couple from hell!
250 – does anyone else get the joke? Has gone over my head I’m afraid.
Yes they may be made up of everyday working people but Union Officials are not everyday working people many are extremists and many are thugs…also the fact that they make up 100% of the ALP Parliamentary membership is a worrying statistic…to have to force people to be a member of a union to get elected by the ALP is a shame…
Plus only 20% of workers are Union members they are a minority group yet hold great sways in the ALP…Gary how many small business owners/big business owners are going to be happy with Greg Combet or Bill Shorten as the Employment and Workplace Relations Minister or renamed the Minister for Unions and other workers.
So what is your prediction of the Roy Morgan poll out tomorrow Glen?
I predict 57-43
Probably not very good Pauline meaning somewhere around or above 55-45, but ill be happily surprised if its better considering the past half dozen Labor gaffs of late…given the PM’s drought assistance announcement i wouldnt be surprise if it was a good (still bad) result for the Coalition say 54-46.
So what is wrong with the average unionist again Glen? You know the ones that get a secret ballot vote on what goes on. Your everyday hard working person. Those radicals who are striking everywhere and running the place with their 20% of the work force. Name all of those mongrel bosses out there Glen. As for Combet and Shorten they actually have a good name out in the community. Your union paranoia is getting to you Glen.
Hint to a Govt that wants to be re-elected don’t piss off 20% of workers, some of them used to vote for you. Not anymore.
When every 0.5% of the vote is important, keep it up Libs.
I meant union bosses Glen.
Just my humble opinion, and I have spoken up for the merits of Julie Bishop here on many occassions, but frankly no-one coming out of the Howard cabinet can honestly describe themselves as ‘free market liberal democrat.’ The behaviour of this government is incompatible with that tag.
Gary its hard for Shorten to be seen as the ‘devil’ when his PR team gets him down to Beaconsfield the moment of the rock collapse to build his ‘good’ profile…
255 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 4:33 pm
Tell that to the exlusive brethren! Tell that to the xenophobic red-necks that form the core constituency of the modern-day liberal party!
Then how do you explain Jasmine the Liberal support for Catholic and independent schools a hallmark of the Howard years trying to give greater choice…the ALP are against free choice unless its to do with social issues (all fair and good mind you in some respects) but the Howard Government has been about free enterprise and giving the market greater power.
Have you gone to the Morgan site and had a look at the effect the “tax gaff” had on the voters Glen? Do yourself a favour. These things fly way over the average person’s head. They may stir you and people like you (rusted ons) up and give you false hope but that’s about it.
I agree with Gary Bruce. 258
Glen, you should desist constantly harassing, disparaging and denigrating hard working Australian workers because of your ideology.
And Union members are just hard working Australian workers.
They are not some kind of inhuman object that you can hate and despise because they have no feelings or emotions. They are like you and me. They have values, ideas, aspirations and they try to make a living like everyone else.
You should not let your internal fears, anxiety and hatred of the “other” rule your heart because they are not “other” but just normal people.
That long list of mongrel union bosses Glen? I don’t see it.
# 264 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
So who is Dick Honan again? What or who is Manildra?
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/12/1060588384214.html
So what ‘free-market’ are we talking about here? You mean the free-market that had a subsidy placed upon a cheaper import of exactly the same product to protect a mate is your new definition of this?
Howard isn’t interested, and never has been, with a free-market. Except when freedom is the freedom of a huge contributor to shaft consumers in whatever form they like. And they can’t even do that right, if the relationship to Telstra is anything to go by…
Pauline,
I must applaud your efforts, but is it really worth your time to respond to Glen’s rants? His “comments” – it’s all just rehashed lines from the conservative playbook. I haven’t heard Glen utter something even close to an original thought – he’s probably a lib staffer working for a retiring member and as such has nothing to do all day but whine about how unfair it is that people don’t recognise Howard’s greatness – big fat yawn if you ask me. Just think your views could be put to better use than arguing with an intellectual brick wall.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/
have a look of the picture of Costelle that pops up on the Australian’s front page. Looks like he jusy realised Howard is not going to hand over.
Hard working HA i have not said they werent though they give the impression that they are sometimes given the recent 15,000 protest in Melbourne when they should have been on the job…
Pauline i cannot believe that you would stand up and condone the actions of Kevin Reynolds & co, how can you support an organisation that supports such actions…
Unions are irrelevant today, because people can bargain without the Unions we are individuals and we shouldnt have to have Union in a position to ruin the economy by scaring away investment in infrastructure because thugs will do anything to get their way…and cost investers and builders millions because of Union action…might i remind you the ALP will destroy the ABCC which has kept those Union thugs inline but ohhh no its out the door to give the Union thugs the powers they once had…
How nice must it be for Kevin Reynolds to look out of his multi-million dollar apartment on the Swan River in Perth when your average joe worker has lost his job when a business goes bust and can’t pay the rent… doesnt seem really fair doesnt it…seems alot like hypocrisy to me.
All this talk about Labor being full of “union officials” is such bullshit. One of the criteria for membership of the party is membership of a union. Yes, there are plenty of union MEMBERS, and some who have, at some point, been union reps or have indeed gone on to work for a union. I myself used to work for a union – in an administrative capacity – but I’m sure if I ever decided to run for parliament then I would be labelled by the Glens of the world as a “union official”.
Working for a union does not make you a union official. A union official is a specific office-holder such as Branch Secretary or Branch President. Being an industrial lawyer, an industrial officer, a union rep or merely an admin person who works for a union does not make you a union official. If that was the case, a number of ex-industrial lawyers who are now Liberal MPs should also be branded “union officials”.
Just get your hand off it, Glen. It’s getting boring.
Optimist…you claim i have no thoughts of my own…then i rant sometimes about the failings of my side of politics and then you and others say i am an intelligent conservative get with the programme just because you rant on about Rudd and Labor doesnt mean your opinions are straight from party HQ get real!
Can you explain Glen just how Government subsiding private medical insurance and private education (notice those little words private) – the Government is not liberal, it is not free market, it has a fairly relaxed attitude to democracy. I think the appropriate tag would be Immoral Rovian Pragmatists. Got anything more appropriate Glen?
Has Kevin Reynolds broken any laws?
If yes he should be dealt with.
Report him to the police and don’t waste my time with one individual and try to smear good honest Australians with it.
Your attempt at ridiculing Gillard with fugly comments and now your attempt to smear good honest Australians says a lot about your ideology.
To preserve the standards of factual accuracy for which this site is justly famed, I should point out that the Reynolds love nest in fact overlooks the Canning River.
# 273 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Glen, there’s a saying that a liar never believes anyone else, and this is one of those types of statements.
Your comments ARE in fact from liberal HQ, and it is very very clear. Me… I’m not a member of a union OR a member of the ALP, and no-one gives me any pointers to the way I should think, act, or talk at all. Your ‘young liberal’ group does exactly that, and you are nothing more than a model representative of that particular group.
Unlike you, I rely upon rational thought, facts, and experience, backed up by an argument based upon reality. You rely upon incomplete understanding, slogans, and marketing material provided by spin-merchants.
You think we’re all the same, and we’re not.
jasmine
You forgot the agrarian socialists in the Govt. why do we have a Deputy Prime Minister who belongs to a party that can only get ~6% of the vote?
William i stand corrected i think it was the new development near Canning Bridge…
Class action started looking for $1 billion in damages from the Federal Govt. over equine ‘flu.
Another nail in the coffin.
ruawake … I quite like the agrarian socialists…
Ruawake…because the people of the Bush deserve a voice…that’s why Vaile is Deputy PM do you really think the ALP are going to give a …. about the bush if they win that’s why they vote for the Coalition time and time again…
Oh and Pi we most certainly aren’t the same…my opinions and beliefs are based on reason and logic yours are based on a warped philosophy of socialism
William shouldn’t he (Mr Reynolds) be able to see the Swan River as well from there … from my window I can see both rivers and his building…
And Glen you lost the songs book silly boy, did you forget that Workchoices has made all Western Australians megarich, megahappy and we all sit on balcony’s of 15 floor luxury apartment blocks. Remember there aren’t any mortgage burdened exploited workers under workchoices sweetheart … see what I said yesterday wannbe candidates cannot be allowed to leave the script they stuff it up every single time. Keep on message.
Glen
Tell that to the voters of Kennedy.
Glen, remember that Bracksy won the bush in 1999 to topple Kennett, and Labor retained virtually all its regional gains in 2002 and 2006.
Glen
A gaff is a fishing term. You mean gaffe, a blunder. Are you still in kinder or are you in the big school?
Sorry, William, it was a non-core promise.
Jasmine if you read my post it was about businesses going bust not being exploited and fired by workchoices lady. And Jasmine if people think their mortgage payments are tough now how bad are they going to be with Gillard or Swan lol… And most people on AWAs in WA are earning more than they would under awards so Labor’s system actually duds people money that employers want to pay them but wont if Fair Work Australia ever comes into existence!
Ruawake Katter was Nat and he is still a conservative
!
Lord D the ALP have lost a lot of the vote they got in 1999 by the 2006 poll and several regional seats were returned to the Libs/Nats in fact that’s where alot of their gains were…
Derek pointing out petty spelling errors demeans you more than it does me im afraid at least i can attack people on policy than childish name calling…you always lose the debate Derek when you go so low…
#282 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
Socialism? Are you sure? My logic is based upon looking at actions, not inventing logic from slogans. I look at the xenophobia as a problem, and based that analysis from my experience. You look at xenophobia as an asset, and base that analysis upon ignorance.
I work for an engineering company, and quite frankly, I’m doing peachy. it doesn’t stop me from recognizing that driving people less fortunate than me less into poverty by stripping away their rights to collectively bargain, is not in their interests, OR mine. I’ve lived in countries that have this environment (including america) and the only thing I’ve ever seen it do is cause division, polarisation, crime and an increase in fundamentalism.
Ya see… that’s called EXPERIENCE. It aint a slogan, it’s not something I get from a fact-sheet from my local liberal branch, and it has absolutely nothing to do with your very stale, and very immature, view of what the word socialism actually means. For you, it’s just something you’ve studied in a book, and have no idea how to put into context, except to relate it to a political party as a slogan associated with a negative connotation.
I’m going to vote for a party that doesn’t demonize helpless people (is that socialisem?), doesn’t strip peoples rights so that they can’t coordinate their resources if they feel they’d be better served doing so (is that socialism), doesn’t try to dis-enfranchise our most vulnerable people by changing the electoral laws (is that socialism), and doesn’t use fear and xenophobia as their primary method of managing primary voter support!
Because ya see Glen… if the liberal party stops doing that (and after this election, they’re not going to have a choice) then they might become electable. Until that time, they’re just a lose collection of neo-conservatives using ignorance, slogans, smear and fear to hang on to power. And you’re just a stupid kid peddling their filth.
I hand out ALP HTV’s in rural booths. Almost without exception the Nat’s workers are “decent” hard working pleasant people, real agrarian socialists. It never ceases to astonish me that their leaders coalesce with the white sand shoe brigade that are the Libs. And the electors in my state seat threw out the “National Treasure” as he was known, & put in an independant, who threw out Kennett.
Glen who mentioned conservatives?
“that’s why they vote for the Coalition time and time again”
Lets try New England
Is that your list Glen of mongrel union bosses. Kevin Reynolds? Then there’s ah, um ….
Tony Windsor was a National MP as well what’s your point these people are conservative but like their local members more than the Nats…
I think Pi needs to not stress out so much about all the problems with the world and how Kevin Rudd will solve all of them because he’s a saint…take a chill pill mate!
Probably not worth much, but Roy Morgan’s reactor shows little reaction from either party’s supporters to Rudd’s tax gaffe, while both sides reacted as one would expect when Costello criticised it in parliament.
http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2007/4216/
So the nice Shrek is helping Harry Potter and the WA ANF escape from teh evil ACTU.
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=41697
Glen
Just to keep the accuracy of William’s site.
“Antony Harold Curties “Tony” Windsor (born 2 September 1950), Australian politician, has been an independent member of the Australian House of Representatives since 2001, representing the Division of New England, New South Wales. He was born in Quirindi, New South Wales, and was educated at the University of New England. He was a farmer before entering politics.
In May 1991, Windsor was first elected to the New South Wales Legislative Assembly as the independent Member for Tamworth. Windsor was originally the preferred candidate of The Nationals for this seat, though was replaced at the last moment due to allegations in regards to a drink-driving incident on the day of his pre-selection. He held this seat for ten years before resigning in September, 2001, to contest the federal seat of New England. He won the seat, and in doing so, defeated incumbent National Party MP Stuart St. Clair. The National Party and its predecessor, the Country Party, had held New England continuously since 1922.”
Tony Windsor was never a Nat.
Laurie Oakes shows how this “team” and “experience” strategy is nothing new.
http://thebulletinelection.ninemsn.com.au/the_alp_team.htm?_cobr=optus
That reactor thing is an utter waste of time
Gary Bruce here is a short list that I have complied for your benefit…few words but ’scum’ can be best to describe these individuals…im sure not all Unionists are as bad as these people but you are looking at a very unflattering group of people in my opinion…and the Unions and the ALP themselves should be displeased with how they have given the Unions a bad name!
Kevin Reynolds
Craig Johnston
John Speight
Sharan Burrow
Norm Gallagher
Martin Kingham
Dean Mighell
Leigh Hubbard
Cesar Melham
‘most people on AWA’s in WA are earning more than they would under awards’
Glen you don’t have statistics on AWA’s because the dishonest clowns who introduced and run workchoices don’t have the courage to release them. So you are stating as fact something that is at best a guess, and worst is just deliberately dishonest.
Secondly you clearly don’t understand the labor market, odd that someone who claims to be free market advocate understands it so demonstrably terribly. In a boom market not only will people be paying above award (making your comparison redundant at best I have much nastier words but I’m a good girl) but the awards would be going up increasing the safety net if Howard and Costello’s negligence can’t be turned around by Rudd and Swan quickly enough to avoid a serious downturn.
Ruawake to be challenging for the seat he’d have had to have been a member of the National Party…and hence a Nat even though he ran as an independent.
Yeah, you’re right. The Canning River is closer, but he’d definitely have a lovely view of both.
*sighs* If only I’d known then I’d have made greater efforts to befriend him last I was in the same room. Can you imagine a beautiful Perth sunset, some lovely Swan Valley wine …. ahhhhh
Tell me you didnt shake his hand Jas!
Kevin Reynolds – Have heard of him and he should know better.
Craig Johnston – Never heard of him. Gee he’s been a naughty boy.
John Speight – Never heard of him. Gee he’s been a naughty boy.
Sharan Burrow – Wow what a demon. Everyone is scared of sharon
Norm Gallagher – Deceased isn’t he?
Martin Kingham – Heard of him but as quiet as a mouse.
Dean Mighell – Not in the Labor Party
Leigh Hubbard – Heard of him but as quiet as a mouse.
Cesar Melham – Never heard of him. Gee he’s been a naughty boy.
Any time you want to detail their misdeeds please go right ahead.
All im saying is id rather have people from the bush supporting my party than the trade Union movement…Gary im sure you have the smarts to search their misdeeds on the net it wont be so hard i assure you…nevertheless we should be talking about the credible Boothby poll and the ‘gaffe’ that cost Cornes a seat in Federal Parliament….
So why do you run through the government lines that being a unionist is automatically bad?
Isn’t that the same as saying that all lawyers are bad?
The government’s only hope is to pretend that politics is black and white, they are running this anti-unionist line because it is all they really have left to talk about. It is a sign they are losing, if they had positive things to say then that is what they would be talking about.
Pi @ 289
Well said.
Also, the old Country Party, now the National Party, have always been the greatest mob of agrian socialists this country has ever encountered. As soon as the Mercedes runs out of petrol, beaut! – another grant from the taxpayer. (I know it’s hard on the land and my comment is not to cast delphiniums on farmers.)
On one hand we have R. Rattuss and his mob saying the individual is supreme and should look after themselves without government support, on the other a party (the Nats) dedicated to picking the public purse.
Optimist Says:168
September 27th, 2007 at 9:21 am
Ah SDA bashing i love it
Norm Gallagher was a Peking-line communist and was never an ALP member. Dean Mighell has been expelled – do you expect us to have him assassinated? Kevin Reynolds ought to be expelled and probably will be. The others are or were perfectly ordinary union officials
Not all Unionsts are bad ShowsOn obviously but there are many in the trade union movement who have done rather terrible things like run throughs and spitting on employees and employeers ect now people like this are going to be off the hook if Labor gets in…plain and simple.
#
207
Glen Says:
September 27th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
She was a communist, then a dedicated socialists, and a massive Union supporter…need i say more she represents a minority of public opinion and yet she could be deputy PM and treasurer…oh and to top it off she’s fugly nuff said!
Adam you must dislike Gillard then if she was a communist. Oh but then again its only ex communist Greens you dont like
Glen, I just looked up Cesar Melham and he is in Victoria. guess what – I live in Victoria and follow the news closely. I haven’t heard of this guy. Let me make it simple for you Glen (you’re the accuser) tell me what this guy has done wrong to be on a list of “union thugs”.
Glen if you have to troll back to someone who died 8 years ago it says more about you than those you mention.
Gary 313#
Cesar Melham
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/jun2000/wf-j30.shtml
“Johnston and fellow MTFU leader Dean Mighell were convicted of contempt of court on May 12 after they convened stopwork meetings last November in defiance of the federal Liberal government’s punitive Workplace Relations Act. The stoppage, involving more than 40,000 manufacturing workers in Victoria, was called to discuss Campaign 2000. Johnston and Mighell were fined $20,000 each and given until June 29 to pay. A third official, Australian Workers Union organiser Cesar Melham, escaped financial penalty after he apologised to the court.”
Hehehe Cesar had to apologise to the courts lol, he got off lucky!
As I suspected Glen, when pushed for evidence you have none and your accusations against the union movement are based on sheer fear, fear of a group of people you neither know or understand.
I dont want to know them Gary and i dont have to understand thuggery i see it with my own two eyes…
Now how many Laborites are celebrating that a future ALP Rudd Government is going to have Wayne ‘Rooster’ Swan as the Treasurer…lol!
So peacefully protesting against something you feel strongly about is thuggery is it Glen?
Nope Glen, no handshaking took place. No need to count my fingers.
“I dont want to know them Gary and i dont have to understand thuggery i see it with my own two eyes…” My point has been confirmed. Hence Glen this argument is over. No use debating with someone who doesn’t want to know the facts.
Ha peacefully yeah when they have the cameras on them Gary…but that’s one thing its how they act on the work site that shows how low some Unionists can go!
Glad to hear that Jasmine you might not be such a ‘terrible’ left winger after all…just think of how sweaty his hands would have been anyway (shudders) lol.
‘left winger’ really Glen you don’t get much to the right of me without being a little scarry and extreme.
But do you know what the funny thing is im sure people on the left on this blog would have political positions similar to people on the right on some issues its just that the left argues that the State can do a better job of providing services while the right generally believes the individual and the free market can do a better job…on some social issues i know i am on the left of the Liberal Party but on others id be on the right…
Glen
In a perverse way, I find your loathing of the word “union” mildly interesting. Were you subject to a bully at school? Was he, it, her, a “union boss”. Did that experience warp your brain cell?
Glen, this is serious. What formed your curious thoughts?
Swan won’t be worse than the gutless treasurer we have now. Costello was too gutless to be leader of the opposition, and now he is too gutless to be prime minister. Keating said it right, he is a low altitude flyer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaLLP4sc_6Q
So does that mean you advocate privatising every school, hospital and prison? I’d love to see how many votes the Liberals would win if that was their policy.
Why do you support the current government then? They are the biggest spending government in Australia’s history! If you believe in small government, you should vote for someone else.
As far as I know, Paul Keating is the only post-WWII P.M. to actually reduce federal government expenditure as a proportion of GDP. It has ballooned to record proportions under Howard.
Derek the reason why i and many people dislike Unions/Union bosses-officials is simply look at actions not words…
One only has to listen to the rantings of Dean Mighell and Kevin Reynolds to turn off more people to the trade union movement…
But also that the Union movement continually paints small business owners as willing to rip off their workers…do you know just how hard it is to find good staff once you’ve got them you wouldnt in your right mind want to dud them and yet the Unions pander to this and i dislike that because it denigrates the work they provide for the community in employing people and providing services…
ShowsOn he had to because he put Australia so far in to debt he had no other option!
What are you going on about? When you work and you get some extra pay for working a Sunday, or you get a day off because you need to attend a funeral, you are making use of provisions that unions fought for and won. They were not volunteered by businesses, unions had to work hard to negotiate such conditions. Are you saying all those conditions are unnecessary, and undesirable?
No, the unions want workers to be able to talk to each other about the conditions they work under, and if they want to, pursue a collective agreement.
WorkChoices is simply designed to make it hard for workers to pursue collective agreements. That is all it is about, it has nothing to do with improving conditions, wages, or helping the economy grow.
Why would a small business want to stop workers from talking to each other about the conditions they work under? Stopping that is inherently undemocratic.
While we are in the mood for scary union officials.
How about:
1. Tony Abbott
2. Brendan Nelson
3. Ronald Reagan
Debt was 4% of GDP when Keating took over as treasurer from Howard, it was 2% of GDP when Keating left office.
Debt went down under Keating. So did government expenditure as a proportion of GDP. Under Howard and Costello it has increased massively, they are big government conservatives. They don’t believe in small government, what they are against is government that they don’t run.
Gippslander,
My Bairnsdale friends (not especially or overtly partisan) referred to the former unlamented National Party MP as “hidden treasure”, a tribute to his subterranean profile.
Glen, At the Victorian election last November, Labor lost just two seats, which can unequivocally be classified as non-metro – Morwell (won by Nationals) and Narracan (Liberal gain). There were evidently issues particular to the Latrobe Valley – water, declining employment opportunities etc. – at work here.
The other Liberal gains apart from three very marginal seats in the outer eastern suburbs were Evelyn which has a significant suburban component, and Hastings which is part of the increasingly urbanised Mornington Peninsula. In any case both of these were on a knife edge, and had swings comparable to those in the suburbs. The Nationals also picked up Mildura from Independent Russell Savage. It was hardly a Liberal triumph in non-metro areas. In fact their vote improvements were largely in formerly safe Liberal seats which came under threat in the 2002 Brackslide, e.g. Doncaster, Box Hill, Mornington, Nepean, Caulfield.
Shrek ran a student union. Hence he must from now on be called a thug.
Glen.
Once again in the attempt to keep this threat accurate.
“slander (harmful statement in a transitory form, especially speech) and libel (harmful statement in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast)”
Libel is the word you are looking for. In my opinion (not libel) there is enough evidence to form a prima facie case against two Govt. Ministers, so that they should face criminal prosecution, for obtaining benefit by deception.
Bill, firstly I don’t believe Gillard was ever a communist. Socialist Forum was formed by people who had left the CPA because they no longer believed in even its mild version of communism, so the fact that she worked for SF doesn’t prove that she was a communist. Gillard worked for SF but I don’t believe she was ever a CPA member. Even she was a communist, she isn’t one now. She is a democratic socialist. This is a political position I don’t sgree with – I’m a social democrat – but it’s a perfectly legitimate one and not at all the same as communism.
Secondly, Gillard belongs to the Socialist Left, a minority faction (and getting more minority all the time) of the Victorian ALP. That means that she won’t ever be either Leader or Treasurer. Those positions will always be held by the Right. And whatever portfolios she and other Left ministers get, they will be members of a Cabinet in which the Right will hold a clear majority, and they will be bound by majority decisions of that Cabinet. So they will not be able to implement “socialist policies” (whatever that expression means in 2007) even if they are minded to.
Thirdly, I don’t condemn people for having once been communists. I was a communist myself in the early 70s, and so were a lot of other people who aren’t now – I’ll debate the intellectual follies of the 70s with you some other time. What I condemn is people who continue to spout Marxist cliches in 2007 without any reflection of the fact that Marxism is a failed, bankrupt and discredited ideology, and also people who sneak into the Greens so they can foist their Marxist views on the well-meaning but naive hippies who make up most of its membership.
Yes, ShowsOn
Costello had every opportunity to grab the prize – but wimped it. He is not the next PM. He’ll scuttle off to McBank to join his mate, the former Victorian treasurer, Stockdale.
Look at the exits over the past few years. Reith, Anderson, Sindonosis ( spelling?) various inept backbenchers, Janet of the Board …
Mosy people today think a commutist is someone who travels to work by public transport.
#207
Glen Says:
Your got to get over the name calling Glen. She is educated, she can obviously work with other people, she holds views a percentage of the population hold, and as for the comments on her looks, what has that got to do with ideas.
I am still not clear why this carry on about the Unions, yes there has been abuse of power, but Unions are part of our system. People who runs unions are just like any other group, good, bad and indifferent.
The hatred of unions has got the Liberal where they are , Howard just couldn’t help himself, he had to kick the sleeping dog.
As for the carry on about communist, I think it is fair to say that today not many people care who owns the means of production, a large proportion is now owned by private citizens living in China, a communist country and a very important trading partner.
We are increasingly a service economy, we need new ideas and new direction not people carrying on using labels that lost their significance decades ago.
Howard protects the Mad Monk AGAIN.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,22492869-5005361,00.html
What makes you think that anyone is listening to Howard now?
Why does anyone bother responding to the Glens? They appear to have the analytical capacity of a gnat. Once he/they had made that truly appalling comment about Julia Guillard being “fugly”, he/they should be treated with the total disdain such a comment deserves. Back on thread, does anyone (with an intellectual capacity beyond kindy Glen/s), have any further information about how Nicole Cornes & the ALP might be responding to, sorry got to say it, Nicole stumbling? As I posted earlier, I thought Penny Wong did a good job of defending her, but I think someone’s got to sit her down with a copy of the policy ( and the other policies!) and make sure she can articulate it/them. I also think she’s quite anxious. There’s rather a lot of us who are quite good at helping people with this sort of problem, would be glad to suggest some names in Sth Aust.
ruawake, Glen is right. Your comment was defamatory and has been deleted.
William Bowe
http://www.pollbludger.com
So the “magician” has got the chooks running around,tilting at windmills and generally blowing smoke
1.Monica,Jas et al sorry for Glen and the other neanderthals rant (i actually find julia quite fetching as it is)
2.Nicole Cornes is “having a go” all plaudits for at least getting out there to the general public (its good to stumble shows she is human)
3.HowardJ has already planned his exit and as i said in aprevious post the rest is smoke and mirrors.
4.The audacity of AbbottT is incredible and howards lack of “ticker” in not admonishing him is an outright slight on the australian public
the “carpet bombing” of anti-labor stories will continue until Howard has enough spine to face the public!
# 293 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
I think you need to see a little bit more of the world than a young-liberals fact-sheet, before you even think you know how to earn a living, let alone solve a problem.
Unlike you, I don’t have a blinkered view of what Kevin Rudd, or the ALP, can or will do in government. But unlike the liberals, they don’t stand for the demonization of helpless people, they don’t stand for the stripping of your right to collectively bargain, they don’t stand for fear, they don’t stand for segregation, and they don’t stand for denying that we are having an effect on our environment that needs to be addressed.
Unlike you, I have a realistic understanding of what a union actually does, instead of relying upon the ignorant fear of a slogan. You’re a silly kid that is still stuck in a student-level debating mind-set, without even understanding how to earn a living. THAT is the level of experience you bring to any discussion regarding unions.
And it shows.
A few weeks ago I predicted Gillard would be the subject of a protracted smear campaign and got snorted at.
I think it’s only the start. Anyhow, I suspect most people have switched off on politics a long long time ago so it’s going to do little good for the Liberal Party.
The Tony Abbot story is just more desperation.
We have been trolled again by Glen with his pathological reaction to unions. Don’t waste your time with Glen. The discussion will go in circles, go nowhere and achieve nothing. Don’t waste time and bandwidth discussing unions with him.
Now that this is settled, how about we get Glen to outline for us the long term vision of this Govt. What have they planned for us?
1. WorkChoices Mar II
2. Nuclear Power Stations
Add to this list Glen and others please…
Why does the Govt want to get re-elected? Is there a plan or is there only obsession about Labor and a fear, smear and negativity campaign we can expect for the future?
Pauline, those are rhetorical questions you put #346. We know you think the government’s time is up. Most bloggers seem to agree with you so it won’t matter what Glen says.
Why is it that anybody with a view different to the ALP gets branded as…
A. Having no opinions of their own
B. A ‘troll’
C. Taking orders from Liberal HQ
This is just the easy way out for the left to avoid debating issues which they cannot respond to…quite simply.
Pauline…there is no workchoices mark II but there is Labor’s IR policy mark II…
Pauline why must you blather about nuclear power stations being the tool of the devil…i think nuclear power is something any sane person should consider if they were serious about dealing with climate change because nuclear has 0 emissions and unlike renewables can provide base load power…
Chernobyl happened a long time ago Pauline give it a rest…the 4th generation reactors are going to be Russian/Ukrainian proof and i think we would be ignorant not to make use of our 30% + reserves of Uranium…by the way Pauline if you are against nuclear power then you shouldnt vote for Rudd because he supports selling uranium to countries who use it for nuclear power…you wouldnt be a hypocrite would you?
The Government wants to be re-elected because it wants to create a full employment economy something that can and will never happen under the ALP and wants to lock in the savings of the mining boom into funds that will continue to provide revenue for much needed infrastructure…at an important cross roads we can’t afford to have a novice at the helm unless Rudd wants to become another Prime Minister Scullin and be in for one term because he couldnt manage an economic down turn…now is the time for experience and not a bloke whose been leader for less than 1 year and in Parliament for less than 10 years the country deserves someone better.
Finally and id say most importantly the Government wants to be re-elected to keep Wayne Swan from buggering up the economy…case closed!
Glen, points ABC are all correct.
Also Minchin has confirmed Workchoices Mark II but ONLHY to achieve your vision of full time serfdom
You have just confirmed Nuclear is coming
Libs have no future – case closed
Glen,
Please tell us more about what you know about buggering.
All you constantly do is repeat whatever the Liberal party line was on a particular day. You rarely demonstrate an ability to think about an issue for yourself. This is what makes people suspicious of your contributions.
Case in point!
WTF? Unemployment in 1973 was 2.5% In the 1980s, the prices and incomes accords were responsible for killing off inflation once and for all. The accords are something that couldn’t be done by the Liberals because of their antagonistic attitude to unions.
348 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
I believe my first comment on this site was an urging to just ignore Glen. His job is to make the debate about him, not the actual subject of the thread. I’d say he’s achieving his objective – in a debate about the (marginally important) seat of Boothby, Glen’s managed 100+ mentions in a field of about 350 comments. I don’t want be negative but to (mis)quote the obvious: “never argue with a fool, they’ll just drag you down to their level & beat you with experience”. You are arguing with a facade.
348 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 8:24 pm
.
Because, Glen, in order to actually have a pathological fear of unions, one must actually have a rudimentary understanding of what they do. Something that you clearly do not have.
You don’t have a pathological fear of anything. What I suspect you have, is a pathological desire to be a politician, and a conservative one at that. Which is why you want to debate all of the time (even when debating subjects for which you know very little) and you clearly do use a liberal party fact-sheet.
You know nothing about unions, only about spewing forth someone elses propaganda, like all good little conservative foot-soldiers do.
If you actually had even the simplest level of experience (you know, having a job, renting a house), instead of a conservative student-activist grasp debating principles, you might have something to add to a discussion on the motivations behind why people want to see the back of this odious government. But all you rely upon are someone elses slogans, and someone elses fears, based upon someone elses market-data. And then you wonder why your argument is recognized as the shallow and useless point-scoring of a sycophant.
You proved all my points Pauline…thankyou very much!
You couldnt destroy my arguments on nuclear power…you couldnt destroy my argument that you use the ‘Liberal Party hack’ as a reason to not address any points because you have no way of destroying my arguments…
Pauline i think you need to wake up and smell the coffee the if anybody wants to achieve full time serfdom it is the ALP by bringing back unfair dismissal laws that WILL cost people their jobs…Workchoices have not increased unemployed it has DECREASED unemployment and wages have INCREASED under workchoices not decreased as your Union comrades told you would happen…
You are a completely ignorant person Pauline if you automatically reject nuclear power as you have done i would have thought people like you would be willing to look at all options to stop climate change like the Coalition unlike the ALP…
Finally there is one argument that you will fob off because you cannot possibly deny this…that the ALP in order to become competitive in elections in Australia has had to put in Right Wing Labor leaders to come even close to beating the Liberals…the Liberals have never sold out their base the ALP have the Liberals dont need to change our political philosophy to try and win elections whilst the ALP has had to time and time again why just look at all those Right Wing Labor Premiers and Kevin Rudd one of the most conservative ALP leaders in their history…
Socialism has no future Pauline and because your views are a relic of the past your views warrant little debate!
Glen, to be fair you must admit you make comments sometimes to provoke a reaction. If you get no attention you just make a more dramatic assertion until someone takes the bait.
Glen, how do you explain rising unemployment in the Northern Territory?
ShowsOn unemployment was so low in 1973 because the ALP and i must admit the Coalition had every industry in Australia protected under tariffs so that unproductive industries still could employ massive amounts of people it has nothing to do with any Liberal (Gorton/McMahon) or ALP (Whitlam) policies…
Sorry Glen – agree to disagree. What about the polls?
Are they based on relics of the past? I wonder which world you are living in. Wake up and smell the coffee and have a good look behind you because there is a huge and massive ruddslide coming your way.
Polls prove nothing. Your arguments are invincible as they do not relate to this reality.
But then the polls can’t be believed because this Govt is the best Govt we have ever had in the history of this Galaxy.
So if Howard’s amazing stewardship is so amazing, how do you explain the amazing polls.
Isn’t political reality an amazing place?
Scary isn’t it Glen when the political reality hits….OUCH!!
# 355 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Neo-conservative and xenophobic policies, backed up by fear and smear has no future, and your views are soon to be a relic of the not-so-distant past.
Your views, as the polls show, warrant little debate.
Pauline as ive told you before and i readily admit that my party the Liberal Party does badly when faced against Conservative Labor leaders that is a fact plain and simple and it helps, it doesnt fully, but it helps to explain the position the Liberals are in at this time…
Pauline Howard hasnt been perfect and i would naive to think that and i never have said that as ive said before Rudd has been smart in agreeing with everything the Coalition does that is popular and everything that is not for example Iraq, Workchoices they go against it so its no wonder Rudd is doing well in the polls that and the question of media bias but that is debatable on both sides…
Pauline i should also remind you that i am positive Liberals back in 1993 displayed as much hubris as you yourself have shown “here is a huge and massive ruddslide coming your way” and it did not auger well for them…if you were intelligent you would hold off your ‘celebrations’ until we know who has won…to do so before does not look good i must admit and as Rudd has said himself he’ll throw a tonne of bricks on anybody showing Hubris so id be watching out if i were you…
CTEP i agree with your statement that “you make comments sometimes to provoke a reaction” that is only because i am a minority conservative on this blog without me it would basically be a Kevin 07 site i know you dont like my opinions but this is a democracy….you are just as entitled as I am in putting forth my opinions and beliefs and debating them with yours…
Glen, the ALP hasn’t agreed with everything.
No nuclear power. No to the stripping of collective bargaining rights.
Trying to paint them the same in order to blur the differences is a good ploy. But it fails on the evidence.
Oh… and yes to Kyoto.
HAHAHAHAH and who got rid of industry protection? Hint: it wasn’t the Liberals.
This thread is becoming tiresome, so I will now be deleting comments I don’t like. Please note that I don’t take kindly to whingeing about my comment deletions, nor do I enter into any correspondence with those who write to me about them.
William Bowe
http://www.pollbludger.com
Actually the Liberal (drys) started the movement towards this just because Labor actually implemented several of the reports that were commissioned under Fraser doesnt mean he doesnt deserve some credit for starting to look beyond protectionism…after all Reagan and Thatcher acknowledged that Fraser was the inspiration for both them in going about de-regulating their own economies…
361 Glen, that’s a bit better effort Glen. Reality is seeping back into the debate.
Just thought I had to bring you back to earth from your Howard Tugging General Waenk hubris.
Howard is not liked by all you know. He might even lose his own seat.
So if you want hubris and arrogance you just need to look at this sorry list: Downer, Abbott, Costello, Ruddock, Andrews et al.
These born to rule types make you sick don’t they? It’s not the Aussie spirit, is it?
Glen, you are an idiot.
Leigh Hubbard and Sharan Burrows are perfectly decent people. You may not agree with their left wing politics but to say what you have said about them is contemptible and shows how little you know.
Not everyone, you. Because you say stupid things.
You continue to parrot “Hawke/Keating couldn’t manage the economy” when everyone with rudimentary economics knows that they set up the modern Australian economy and laid the foundations for the current boom. There are plenty of legitimate arguments to be had about what public perceptions of these are, or whether every policy decision was good but your blanket claims show that you are either ignorant, or propagandising, or both.
You have been frothing “Ooh communists! Unionists!” like that is some kind of an argument. There is no factual basis to most of your claims and the mindset it is based on was out of date 30 years ago.
You bang on about the experience line when it has been demonstrated how often this line has failed to work. When asked to provide evidence that it has worked you go missing in action – but pop up a day later to repeat the same line as if nothing had happened.
And tell us again about how long Howard was Opposition leader comared to Brumby?
William: while you are deleting defamatory comments you might want to look at Glens #299.
#299 is stupid, but not defamatory.
Let’s lay off Glen for a while and play the “guess tmorrow’s Morgan 2PV” game instead. That’s much more fun.
And I won’t whinge if you delete that last one either, William as long as you check out the one I suggested
I keep trying, but I struggle to see the pattern.
Is it days with a T that the Greens are feral hippies and the other days that they are inner urban intelligentsia?
Your call – but I would have thought that calling people scum and “hard to find worse people” was borderline.
Well, I’m more and more convinced that the true voting intention hasn’t changed for months and probbaly won’t change for some weeks yet. So I’d say that the most likely chance is a small opposite movement from the last one and say 57.5/42.5
58/42
54/46
59/41
Mere abuse is not defamation. For something to be defamatory it has to be a specific allegation or characterisation that has the capacity to cause actual loss of reputation to the person defamed. An anonymous fool calling Sharan Burrow “scum” does not damage her reputation in the eyes of reasonable people. It probably enhances it.
Quite so, Adam.
Oi,
Cop yer smack and get on with it.
William’s blog. William’s rules
Bewdy! Another poll! Predict Libs will gain coupla points. Might even be reported in the GG.
ABC TV news, Sydney, 9.30 PM: “Govt forces Rudd into back-flip re ministerial appointments.” Or something like that.
Has to be a work experience kiddie in charge at the subs’ desk.
On the other hand the “gay” allegation about a Liberal minister was defamatory, because it would have damaged his reputation in the eyes of specific categories of people – his family, his party colleagues, his preselectors. Even if it was true a court could still find it to be defamatory, if it was spread maliciously and without a public interest justification. (The law on this varies from state to state.)
Here Here
The Speaker has made the ruling…now lets get on with the debate…Morgan poll (shudders)…im tipping a 55-45 or 54-46 result…hopefully more people in WA will have got a call from Morgan…
Also i am tipping the Nationals vote to be on 0.5%…a new record for Morgan…
Anyone know who is on lateline tonight? Don’t want to stay up if it isn’t worthwhile, thanks
Adam, I’m not a lawyer but I’m pretty sure that the uniform legislation enacted recently changes this for material published after Jan 1 2006 and justification is now a defence in all states.
Glen,
It is actually Hear! Hear!
Here Here is what John Howard will say when someone asks who is reponsible for the Liberal massacre that is about to take place.
Glen vs Pauline: terrific debate!
Tony Abbott’s comment linking Federal Labor to the problems at Sydney’s Royal North Shore Hospital: gutter politics at its worst, but of course you won’t see any criticism from either News Ltd or the ABC.
Speaking of the ABC: is Greg Jennett on some sort of retainer from the Howard Government? He really seems to hate Rudd and the Labor Party.
My guess is the real numbers are around 54/46
Which means Morgan will over estimate labor as usual and print numbers 56/44.
Incidently, didn’t anyone see the Chaser’s take on the Lateline/Downer interview last night. I’m surprised by the lack of comments on this blog
I laughed out loud so much my neighbours banged on the walls to shut me up.
Chaser is repeated late on Friday night. I recommend Downer haters should watch this
I agree Howard Hater – Abbott is way out of line with his comments – it is filthy politics and I hope it comes right back at him.
Morgan prediction 55/45
Tony didnt say Federal Labor were to blame for the incidents he merely said that the ALP runs the NSW State hospitals and these unfortunate events occurred under Labors watch and if you thought that the ALP did a bad job of running state hospitals why would you elect them to take over and run them all?
I dont defend Abbott all that much because he an uber religious conservative…but he points out Labor failures when he sees one…also Rudd hasnt got a great record when it comes to hospitals cutting out thousands of hospital beds in QLD in the 1990s…
Regardless of whoever is in power if that type of thing happens the party in charge Liberal or Labor should be questioned severely…
HH it is getting so tiresome to have to debate everybody where is Nostro or Steven???
Martin B, you may well be right. I’m not a lawyer either, and since I’m not a journalist anymore I no longer have a professional interest in this and haven’t been keeping up.
I don’t think the polls are moving at all at present – everyone is in suspended animation waiting for Howard to make up his bloody mind. 55/45.
Adam
Points taken, but it should be made clear that libel comes into play when an allegation, rumour, etc, is published. In any form. Slander, the most difficult to prove in court, is verbal. The charge of slander rarely succeeds. And, yes, different rules apply in different states. Truth is no defence in Victoria? It is a mish-mash, hence the reluctance of MSM to pursue investigitive journalism. It’s too hard, too costly.
Glen,
It is called “dog whistle” politics.
Communicating what you want to a select group, without exactly saying what you mean.
388,
You totally miss the point being made by #387 and others, including myself. The point is not about Labors policies regarding hospitals. The point is about making political hay out of a woman’s misery and sadness at a miscarraige. The *insensitivity* is the issue here. I don’t know if you have a partner, Glen. But imagine yourself in the shoes of that distressed husband who was talking to reporters yesterday or the day before. I think any male in their right mind [and Tony Abbot was NOT in his right mind nor was JH for refusing to rebuke him] would appreciate the delicate situation and give the couple time to grieve their loss in private. It is bad enough that it has to go through the media in the first place because of where the miscarraige took place.
The grieving parents didn’t need Tony Abbot giving this story another leg to stand on so that their heartache is drawn out longer.
Takes a woman to explain it to you.
Thanks Julie for the explanation. You got it!
Guess Morgan 56/44
The uncertainty regarding the date is becoming a problem, business-wise.
Glen: even you should be ashamed of Tony Abbott: take off those rose coloured Liberal Party supporter glasses.
So Julie are you saying that State Governments that run hospitals who end up causing this much grief to innocent people do not deserve to be criticised whatsoever?
I totally understand and respect the fact these people should be left alone, especially by the media but we cant just sit by and allow hospitals to act like this somebody has to say something about this, we and im sure they want accountability…
Ideally the media should have not interviewed them because obviously they were going through a horrific time but they (media) deliberately made it a news story…
This type of politics is called Ambulance Chasing. You will always find sad and tragic stories (just watch Today Tonight/Current Affair) out there. But to use personal tragedy as a political football is repugnant.
But then nothing surprises me with desperate Libs. Under Howard they have vacated the centre of politics and now occupies the loony hansonist fundamentalist right.
By vacating the centre, they allowed the ALP to claim it and become the mainstream again. This is the real story of the downfall of a once proud liberal party.
If Glen had any brains, he would be concerned about the state of his party and do something about it. If they lose, what rump will be left. If you lose your heart and sell your soul to the devil, all that you are left with is a vacuous vessel. They have no policies about the future and no vision.
The only passion they can still muster is negative and a hatred of Labor and Unions. They are a ghost party and an empty devoid of new ideas.
A sad and sorry tale…
Women should give birth at home, attended by a midwife. Childbirth isn’t an illness, should not take place in a hospital, and doesn’t require a doctor unless something goes wrong. If childbirth was returned to the home (or to birthing centres run by midwives), there’d be a lot less pressure on our public hospitals.
I think Pauline you should be asking some very stern questions about Morris Iemma and the NSW State Health Minister because as far as im concerned these people have a lot to answer for…but i guess you are so partisan that you can forgive the state of our hospitals because the ALP runs them…
Julie @ 392
Abbot is a poor excuse for a man.
Julie explained to you Glen in vain that the problem is using this as a political football. Whoever is to be blamed should be blamed but don’t score political points of other people’s misfortune.
What about the sad state of the Liberal Party? You only want to answer part of my point? Of course.
“Abbot is a poor excuse for a man”
So is Julia Gillard.
#386….don’t you just hate thin cell walls.
396,
If anyone deserves criticism over the hospital crisis, be they the Federal Libs or the State Labor, this wasn’t the time nor the place.
I am not weighing in on the arguement over whose fault it is that the crisis exists nor how to fix it.
The media interviewing them initially wasn’t a problem. As far as the husband was concerned, that hopefully would bring attention to the problem and get it straightened out for future familes in similar circumstances.
Abbot was the only issue here. You can go crawl back under your rock along with Abbot and the rest of the front bench. Under the rocks is where we find mushrooms and fungus that grows because it can’t see the light of day.
So if you think it could make a political point out of someones misfortune Pauline then by your logic it was wrong to make a political point out of demonising small businesses that put staff on AWAs like the ALP did trying to score points of people supposed ‘misfortune’…and what about Labor making political points about Iraq saying its hopeless because people are dying so we should just pack up cos its so ‘terrible’…
The State Labor Government should shoulder full responsibilities for this and they ought to be ashamed…if you cant attack a level of government for failing its citizens how are you supposed to make the country better?
Glen you should enter politics as you refuse to debate the issue re Abbott.
Hello …………..
I have 4 children. My oldest is 21. Had I not been in a hospital when I went into labor with him he would have been stillborn.
This woman Cornes has had more scrutiny than most from day dot – it is well known amongst journalist circles that a certain journo scraped the bottom of the morality barrel in order to get a reaction out of her at one of her first interviews.
Glen the list of Lib policies for the future continues
1. WorkChoices Mark II
2. Nuclear Power Stations
3. 20 year war in Iraq
4. Join US in war on Iran
5. Abolish States
6. Abolish Elections
7. Promote Glen to Gov-General Waenk
9. Abolish Governor-General office
Howard’s rabbit in the hat is the rabbit scared and panicked running away from calling the election…
Funny there is no more talk of rabbits.
God and you think im a wacky right wing nut if i am one of those what does that make Pauline lol!
I am predicting a move back to the Coalition….not Labor policy announcements while the Coalition have got on with the job of governing and helping our farmers who need a helping hand…54/46 even if it is a Morgan poll which will undervalue the bush vote…
Adam says
” I’m a social democrat – but it’s a perfectly legitimate one and not at all the same as communism” .
What is a social democrat please explain…
And the Greens are full of naive marxists, although i am not a greenie i would like to see your evidence…
And finally if women give birth at home pressure would be taken of the public hospitals.. fair dinkum…
Adam put simply public hospitals are struggling because Governments in this country don’t fund them and because of an illogical private health rebate scheme from the Howard Government..
Time we either borrowed some money or spent more don’t you think.
And where do you get the midwives from Adam.. possibly opens the door to unskilled people entering the nursing field.
If men got pregnant childbirth would be considered an illness.
Glen is that 54/46 in favour of Coalition or Labor?
Please Explain?
Derek Corbett at 211 says it’s ‘the last time he’ll bait Glen’. It’s a sport on Poll Bludger and so much fun, why stop? That’s why Bill lets it run.
As for Gillard, the young uns love her ( at least the twenty-something boys with any interest in politics seem to) and Glen must be an absolute ‘glamour’ to be able to criticise Gillard for her looks.
Gerard Henderson actually predicted the Rudd/Gillard ‘dream team’ ascension at least two years ago in a Herald article, if memory serves me correctly.
GH is pretty funny, as he was a failed arbitration inspector in a former life – he railed in one of his columns about the poor oppressed small business people who had to pay penalty rates!
Maybe he should rail against the rip-off trolley collection contractors, supported by the big supermarkets paying kids working for these outfits as little as $5 per hour. If the businesses were incorporated they got away with it under SerfChoices via AWA’s, because there were no junior rates applicable to them under the ‘Fair Pay’ Standard or the AWA’s just stripped most conditions away. And is this exactly what the Rodent et. al. wanted? You Betcha!
The ‘greatest’ ‘Workplace Reformation’ program since ‘enterprise bargaining’ was introduced by Keating, which was introduced to kill the Unions and it nearly succeeded!
The Rodent tried to finish the job, but only succeeded in resurrecting the Far Left like the Spartacist League, not to mention re-invigorating the Unions by giving them an arch-enemy they could fight, instead of a sagging ALP ‘leadership’ they couldn’t fight, as their future appointments to parliamentary seats and government boards depend on ALP Governments’ largesse.
‘Protected by Law’ was one of the greatest bald-faced lies ever told by a Government with taxpayer’s money!
Labor should just re-run the Rodent’s original Serf Choices ads to remind people they weren’t ‘protected by law’ at all and that’s why they had to create a ‘fairness test’ for AWA’s.
Keep Glen on, as we will run out of things to say about dumb candidates from both parties before the election campaign even starts – come to think of it, we probably won’t, as there’s always a bunch of incompetents seeking elected office – it makes intelligent people like Garrett and McKew so very dangerous ( especially to their own parties). Garrett isn’t aligned, as far as I’m aware – but in his area he must ‘dance’ with the Right, as Bill and Adam could no doubt attest – I doubt he likes it, but then many compromises are no doubt required in order to gain sufficient power to achieve anything lasting, as Garrett no doubt wants to do. Don’t think he’s an absolute megalomaniac, but time will tell!
#413 exactly Paul K
Thommo @ 402
Great stuff. Just goes to prove my point that libs are essentially against women holding positions of power. In your universe, they should be barefoot and pregnant, cooking Father’s dinner. And silent. News for you – we have moved on since mediaeval times and – Shock, Horror, Probe! – they are now considered equals. They now have the vote!
Suggest you read a big book.
A few things RE Hospitals that the feds could fix.
1. Improve access the GPs. I live in Eden Monaro and I need to notify my doctor (or any doctor within 2 hours) at least 1 week prior to my illness. Where do I end up? AT THE HOSPITAL
2. When I get to the hospital what do I find? IT’S ALL OF PEOPLE WHO SHOULD BE IN AGED CARE
I think we all know whose responsibility aged care and doctors are.
3. Saying its the States fault doesn’t fix it.
This is all very silly and unproductive. See you all for tomorrow’s poll.
New Zealand has been able to reduce the number of hospital visits by putting resources into preventative medical treatment. Treating high risk groups of people before they get sick in a way to prevent their ever needing expensive medical treatment. Why isn’t Australia doing the same thing?
BaztheSpaz @ 415
Ok, sport. Just thought I was being a waste of space.
As for WorkChoices, I remember reading a comment from one of the legal eagles involved in drawing up the original legislation. Went something like: “Forget what they tell you – there is no protection for workers in this …” It was in the Fin. Review.
Quite agree those polls are very productive…
413
paul k Says:
September 27th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
If men got pregnant childbirth would be considered an illness.
…..
This kind of misses the point. Things can go wrong before, during and after confinement. If things go wrong, being in hospital and having qualified staff available is an excellent advantage to have. People who dismiss these things should reflect on how hard and how long women fought to have maternity wards and then maternity hospitals established, funded and supported.
I have been present at three births. Two were not easy, as they say. The third nearly came to an untimely and tragic end. Luckily it did not. In each case, having access to hospitals with skilled staff who knew what to do was essential, in fact life-saving, on two occasions. The idea that these are somehow dispensable luxuries is, really, just idiotic.
Paul K they now have a system in the Uk which provides bonuses to doctors on the basis of them say stopping patients from smoking or getting patients to eat healthy foods.. or to exercise far more often..
This kind of preventative medicine could be tried here.. instead of the bonus schemes of getting patients out of hospital at quicker rates.. or seeing more patients…
I am uncomfortable saying it. but more than a pregnancy miscarried in NSW yesterday: integrity and decency suffered the same fate.
Really, this episode symbolises so much of what is wrong in the public health system: not enough nurses, not enough beds, not enough doctors, not enough money, not enough willingness to fix things. Instead we have seen a cruel opportunism on parade. It is really quite shameful.
Agree.. but plenty of beds, champagne, beautiful carpeted floors and yummy food across the road in the private hospital.
405 Glen Says: September 27th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
You’re comparing an employee contract with losing a child? Only a school-boy could say something so stupid.
Optimist (425) and others – what happened to that woman sounded terrible, and no doubt a tragic situation for the people involved. But i wonder just how much blame can be sheeted home to the hospital. Yes, hospitals are under-funded, and they could be more efficiently run, but I’m sure if any of you has spent a weekend night in casualty, you’ll know how chaotic it is. At the risk of being indelicate, the woman in question was suffering a miscarriage. There’s probably nothing that could’ve been done to save her baby. It sounds like she was treated a little insensitively, but it’s quite possible that she was there at the same time as victims from, say, a car accident, people whom perhaps the hosptial staff could do something about. That’s how triage works.
None of this is probably much comfort to the woman in question (or her husband), but I do find these “hospitals in crisis” stories a tad tiresome. Seems like a soft target to me – a commonly held misconception. Let’s not forget – hospitals are places where sick people go, so it’s not such a surprise to know that distressing things happen in them. I have to say that most of my, my friends’ and family’s experiences in them have been pretty good (illness and injury notwithstanding).
Pi only someone with the intelligence of a small child could not comprehend my basic post which was in plain simple english that you couldnt understand but for your benefit Pi ill run you through it again…
Other left wingers were saying it was wrong to make a political point out of other peoples suffering (suffering in general) so it is fair to say that if according to those Laborites it is fair to use peoples suffering for political points such as on IR or Iraq that it is being hypocritical to attack Abbott for supposedly doing the same thing…
I think you were going to far to say i am comparing the death of a child with an employee contract i wasnt doing that i was pointing out the ALP supporters hypocrisy for attack Abbott when the ALP make political points out of peoples suffering as well…
What’s more surprising is your failure to condemn the ALP State Government for failing the Health System but noooo because they are Labor it wasnt their fault lets beat up on Tony Abbott for pointing out the failures of Labor on Health supposedly ‘their issue’…
Holy crap! Could Joe Hockey be any more out of touch! He says that HE should be able to negotiate an AWA with John Howard, and if he did he says he would earn about double his current $205,000 per year salary!
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22493525-952,00.html
“I’d love to have a bonus scheme and I’d love to have arrangements that rewarded on the basis of hours of work. I’d happily trade off everything,” he said.”
Basis for hours of work!? That sounds to me like an AWARD!!! He gets paid $205,000 a year for god sake, that means you can’t complain if you need to work on Sunday or on a public holiday!
I thought Hockey was a well meaning bloke who was in the unfortunate position of having to flog a dog of a policy. But now he comes across as being more out of touch than Howard, Costello and Abbott.
paul k @ 420
“New Zealand has been able to reduce the number of hospital visits by putting resources into preventative medical treatment. Treating high risk groups of people before they get sick in a way to prevent their ever needing expensive medical treatment. Why isn’t Australia doing the same thing?”
I must be getting soft. As an expat Kiwi I never thought I’d let one like that go past …..
Seriously, I completely agree. Mum & Dad are aged (89 & 92) but live in their own unit in Hamilton, are visited regularly, and are provided with housekeeping several times a week to help keep them independent and out of a home. While both protested at the time, they were given and setup with an adjustable, aluminium walking stick each with the explanation that if one walking stick in ten prevented a fall and a resulting breakage, it was very cheap insurance. They each have their personal call system and have assistance, a heated pool, a library and meals available if necessary as well as weekly social events. Dad won the snooker Comp, held every Tuesday for several months. Fired him right up it did. : )
Makes heaps of sense, allows minimal disruption to their lives and is a win any way you want to measure it.
It’s simple commonsense, unavailable in the capital cities ..
429 Glen Says: September 28th, 2007 at 12:15 am
You can run through it as many times as you like… you think it’s comparable to use the death of someones child to score political points, to someones employment contract to score political points.
THAT’s what you said.
I have an 11 week old child, so I know what I’m talking about. What Abbott said was sickening. You are defending the indefensible. Again.
Hugo. My recent experience in a regional hospital, and later at St V’s in Melbourne was also pretty good. But the fact is that the triage nurse whom I was congratulating on his good work told me that he was quitting for a job as a process worker in a pie factory, because the pay was better and there was no stress. Two ward nurses were discussing leaving because they couldn’t get child care. The best nurse in Melb spent most of her time compiling performance stats.
If we don’t spend some resources on nursing care, then we get the health system we deserve! We’ve got to make it more worthwhile for these dedicated people to save lives, rather than make meat pies. we’ve got to give them promotion to a worthwhile position at the hospital coalface, and not into a job that any 2 bit accountant could do better.
BTW I really do feel strongly about this!
When Glen and Pi go head to head, tedium prevails. Please stop.
William Bowe
http://www.pollbludger.com
Joe Hockey – “…I’d happily trade off everything”
You already did Joe and it shows; your intelligence.
So tired. Call the election, please. Thanks cte.
Women should give birth at home, attended by a midwife. Childbirth isn’t an illness, should not take place in a hospital, and doesn’t require a doctor unless something goes wrong. If childbirth was returned to the home (or to birthing centres run by midwives), there’d be a lot less pressure on our public hospitals.
Adam 398
Hmm.
Childbirth may not be a medical disorder, but it is probably the most dangerous time in the life of a mother and a child. One of the few big advances in clinical medicine has been safer birthing.
The solution is to have birthing centres attached to hospitals, where women can give birth without interference with a midwife of their choice. But if something does go wrong during or just after birth (and it frequently does), then they and the child can be whipped through the doors straight into the hospital proper.
An interesting diversion into the health system in the wee small hours between polls. Somewhere between Optimist at 425 and Hugo at 428 lies the truth of the Royal North Shore matter I think… it is true a triage nurse would drop a miscarriage in progress down the list, especially if it had started in earnest, and we do not know what circumstances prevailed in the A&E at the time. And yet, there is the stark and simple matter of human dignity to be considered, the horror of meeting such a trauma in the toilet down the hall instead of on a trolley or in a bed with your grieving husband next to you. Is it worth diverting some resources for a few hours to make that happen? Even at risk of bumping an asthmatic child into the waiting room a few hours longer? Hard to say unless you can replay every minute of the terrible night and weigh the circumstances.
The points above re preventative care are well made. My wife, a trained nurse, now works in Public Health. She’s asleep now and wouldn’t be thrilled if I go in there demanding the exact numbers, but she has talked in the past about the best accepted longitudinal studies and what they say about the fantastic leveraging of preventative dollars in health care. Spend a hundred bucks helping someone give up fags when they’re thirty, you save twenty thousand a quarter century later on the lung cancer/gangrene/cardio treatments. You can apply those numbers to any number of problems… skin and cervical cancer, osteoporosis, heart disease, diabetes…
The problem is democracy. Such measures cost big dollars to reach the whole target population, but the pay-offs can be a generation away. In political speak, that means you’re putting a hole in your budget, but helping top up some other bugger’s surplus way down the track. No points in it at all.
Unless you’re good at ‘the vision thing’ and can sell it to the electorate because, hey, it’s a good idea and the right thing to do.
Sorry for the long blurt after interminable lurking.
Morgan 57/43. I’m guessing of course, but so are you all.
Re 410,
Funny that
….. Shanahan even gives up the game this Friday morning too, if for only one day 
. I actually wrote a comment to his story (don’t know if it will be published) and started it by “nice to see you write a positive article for a change”.
The Morgan poll. It’s being taken with the footy finals so that may impact on the result.
I reckon its going to turn towards the govt. two reasons. people are getting sick of the campaign and the govt’s line that its not campaigning hasn’t been discounted. My thinking is it will show a 3 point move towards the govt. If it doesn’t I thing everyone has made up their mind and the Libs are all but defeated.
I think Morgan will be similar to Galaxy and ACN online.
57-43.
I’m a little surprised that the ALP aren’t making more of the fact that Howard is holding off on calling the election, hoping things will swing his way.
The 2004 election was October 9th. There’s a decent chance Howard won’t even have called this year’s election by then…
It reeks of desperation and the ALP should be capitalising on it. They should be painting Howard as gutless, afraid to face the people.
Why aren’t they?
No time to check if this has already been posted. The Oz has resurrected this poll and you can still vote, about Wayne Swan as Treasurer.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22073824-5013404,00.html
Misty, they are. It’s just noone particularly cares.
CTEP – Well if they’ve been saying it in the last week I don’t feel the media have been reporting it!
The October 9 2004 date is interesting. Interesting because there was a tip from a bureaucrat on Crikey that the current government TV advertising was scheduled to end on October 9 this year (presumably at the latest – I suspect they can easily pull them earlier).
I wonder if Howard realises that holding off calling the election until after the 2004 poll date will leave him open to some pretty serious criticism.
So the October 9 date may be a tentative deadline of sorts for him to have called the election by.
Just a thought…
Howard interviewed on 3AW this morning was asked if he’d stay on in Bennelong if he won the seat but lost the election. The answer was “I don’t know” then waffle. He”l be off fater than a honeymooners if that series of events happens. So much for the fine people of Bennelong.
When will todays poll be released?
Morgan is usually released about 1.00 pm. It has been a little earlier and a little later but that’s about the time.
Ok thanks Gary Bruce, do they just release it via their website or leak it to different news organisations beforehand. Are they aligned to any media organisation?
If anyone believes Howard will remain as a backbencher in any circumstance they’re deluding themselves. Can you imagine him flying Qantas? Having a backbencher’s office at Parliament House? No way…
These polls are of course meaningless in that they are too easily manipulated by anybody with the patience and the will. If they tied them to a persons IP number then it would be much more difficult for people to multiple vote and I think one of the other Murdoch papers does that.
They are also meaningless as they are really only polling the political persuasion their on-line readers and reflects the views of that demographic.
To use them as the basis of a story would be fairly poor work.
CTEP: Or having a backbenchers pay? He’d get more from his super than being on the backbench
Morgan F2F have been quite erratic over the past few months
before this always high 50s…
55/45
54.5/45.5
58.5/41.5
54/46
60.5/39.5
59.5/40.5
56.5/43.5 (15/16 Sept)
The last phone poll was 21/22/ August 60/40.
So you could get a 55/45 and be none the wiser as the next one might be 59/41.
All year their has been this correlation between Newspoll and the others where Morgan F2F had always seemed a few points higher. The last Newspoll and Galaxy should tell us this Morgan should be around 58/42. But then Morgan did go erratic. MOE?
For Morgan I’d like to see whatever result will get John Howard to call the election as soon as possible. 25/75 (ALP/Coalition) please.
Kina, you’re using the actual preferences of electors here, rather than the 2004 based preferences, which Morgan uses in his headline figures. I think the only real outlier there was the 54.5-45.5 end August poll; it could be that Morgan re-arranged his weighting to get closer to Newspoll, etc.
Unless there is a big swing to the coalition Morgan is rarely commented in the MSM. I maybe wrong but I think Crikey comments on Morgan. No leaks that I know of. I find on the Morgan site or this site.
I can’t believe it took so long for the media to actually get Howard to answer what would happen if he won his seat but the Coalition lost the election. Now he has refused to rule out retiring. I also read on the GG website that Howard is basically stuck in Syd, especially Bennelong, while Rudd is doing a world wind tour through marginals all over the country. Obviously this might chance once the campaign has officially started, but it’s ground that he will have to make up and Rudd can easily go back to the marginals after Howard has been to them.
BTW, GetUp only needs another $20K to reach their new $200K target and if they get that the ad will be shown in regional areas over the weekend.
The GetUp! fundraiser is phenomenal. They’ve raised $5k in the last 50 or so minutes. There are some state Liberal branches that could only dream of such largesse.
Today’s Oz editorial: “Howard is struggling in the polls … because he appears to have little idea of what to do next.” And: “It (the government) is starting to look like a mob that doesn’t deserve to be considered. It must pull together, put its hand up and say something worth listening to.”
Well, well. Setting the scene for glowing praise after Howard’s next big pronouncement.
The editorial will go something like this: “At last the government has its act together and has come up with a far-reaching and bold plan for the future … blah, etc.”
Pity GetUp can’t get its ad into WA – all slots are taken. What are the chances of anyone swapping their advertising time with them for the resultant publicity? Halls of power people?
Honestly, if a government of 11 years can look like that with all the resources both financial and intellectual they have access to then it truly is a clueless mob. With all the natural advantages of encumbancy they still appear like they dont deserve to be considered then they have to be useless.
A Liberal candidate in NSW advises me: “the Liberal Party is doing their best to finalize all their seats for the up-coming Federal Election. I think by next week every seat should have a candidate.” They said that a month ago, but I guess they must be close by now.
Rudd has said it all year long, Howard only cares about this election and won’t worry about what happens 10-20 years down the track. It was a clever ploy, rather than attacking his age, he attacked Howard on not looking to the future. I heard Howard specially say after the whole leadership thing, the Coalition had to sort out policies for the next 3 years, i.e. just enough to get to the next election. It’s not very ‘aspirational’ now is it? Even Howard’s climate change policies won’t really start until after the following election, so we waste 3 years and they will campaign at the next election on policies they announce this election.
This weekend’s for footy, not politics – http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Finals-weekend-for-footy-not-politics/2007/09/28/1190486528231.html
No wonder the election hasn’t been called, Howard wants all the free advertising he can get. And we end up paying top dollar for it all too.
Re. the Tommy Raudonikis and Peter “Crackers†Keenan radio adds:
I don’t know much about Crackers Keenan (other than the fact that he’s crackers), but I do know a thing or two about Tommy Raudonikis.
Memo to Coalition types: never – repeat never – get involved in a stoush with Tommy Raudonikis; there will only ever be one victor. The loser will always walk away wishing that they’d never come into contact with the old Newtown and Western Suburbs warhorse.
A peed of Tommy Raudonikis is a sight (and sound) to behold.
This article by Dennis quotes ALP internal polling that basically confirms what we already know from public polls. Dennis suggesting Labor is trying to create a bandwagon effect.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/dennisshanahan/index.php/theaustralian/comments/paradox_of_labor_strategy/
Who cares if Labor try and create a bandwagon effect. Are they seriously trying to argue that Labor shouldn’t be trying to convince people to vote for them? How dare they!
RE: Raudonikis and Kennan:
What an absolute master stroke from the ALP – all political allegiances aside, that is super-sharp campaign thinking. Can you imagine how peoples ears are gonna prick up when they hear two of the most familiar and distinctive voices in football bagging the Government for wasting our money?
The Age reports:
Howard may quit sooner
Prime Minister John Howard has refused to rule out quitting politics if he wins his seat of Bennelong but his government loses this year’s election.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/howard-may-quit-sooner/2007/09/28/1190486523047.html
At last!!! I can never understand how long the MSM journos take to ask the obvious questions. Howard claims to stay no matter what. Then says as long as Coalition is in Govt he will eventually go to backbench when handing over.
The obvious question was always: What do you do if you win your seat but lose Govt.?
OF COURSE HE IS GOING TO RESIGN!
So this was always an own goal. Bennelong voters might as well vote for Maxine to cut out the middle man and avoid the high likelihood of a by-election.
Once again, the best thing about a Dennis Shanahan piece is reading all the derogatory comments directed at him in the comments section below.
Optimist i think its highly dubious to be attacking the Government for Commonwealth advertising when Keating did exactly the same thing in the lead up to 1996…face it incumbent Governments State and Federal can and will continue to do this regardless of what party is in power. If you want to complain about this i could just as easily point out the millions of dollars worth of ACTU advertising that only benefited the ALP who payed nothing for those biased pieces of work but no because thats a fact of life as is Governments using advertising money in an election year to get people to see what they’ve been doing….
Glen how little you know or how quickly and conveniently you forget the very recent past:
On September 5, 1995, six months before voters made him Prime Minister, John Howard issued a statement as leader of the opposition. It said, in part: “In a desperate attempt to find an election life raft, the prime minister [Paul Keating] is beginning an unprecedented propaganda blitz using taxpayers’ money. This soiled government is to spend a massive $14 million of taxpayers’ money over the next two months as part of its pre-election panic. If the full communications barrage runs its course it could reach $50 million …
“This grubby tactic will backfire.
“Taxpayers will see through it. They don’t want their money wasted on glossy advertising designed to make the prime minister feel good. Keating is about to boost government promotion to a massive new high. It’s time a brake was put on this fraud. There is clearly a difference between necessary government information and blatant government electoral propaganda. Now the government is going to use taxpayers’ money on a disgraceful scam.
“In any other business, the shareholders would revolt and throw out the management which wasted their money. The problem for the government is not communication. The problem is that it is tired, it has broken too many promises, it has hurt too many people. This propaganda blitz will make the electorate feel even more angry.”
Do you support Howard or not Glen? Is he right or worng?
Yes, but Glen, most people wouldn’t be paying too much attention to government advertising most of the time (not least because they are poor ads). But when people are bombarded with these ads during the two most watched telecasts of the year, they might well notice them. Consequently, Labor using legendary footy players to bag the government during the same ad breaks seems like good tactics to me.
Couldn’t give a flying about a bunch of hyped-up thuggees prancing around with a football – circus for the masses. Pleeeese, can this thingy be sport free. No doubt Rattus will most the most of it. Really gets up my snout.
Of course i support Howard and he is right to do this because if Labor were in they’d be doing exactly the same thing…
Pauline your argument is baseless because Howard did the same thing in 1998, 2001, and 2004 just as all the State Labor Governments did the in the lead up to their elections and they won those…i’m afraid you’re going to need to find a better argument because yours falls at the first hurdle my dear lady.
Wasn’t this the same bandwagon effect both Howard and the press tried to create with the last Newspoll, until Galaxy spoiled the party? AND the basis of their bandwagon was? The poll change suggested they would only get thrashed, not obliterated.
‘He hit me first’ doesn’t wash with this one Glen. Take a level of abstraction to your approach, and deny there are not ethical concerns with either party at any level spending taxpayer money in this way. Regardless of who wins, I hope this becomes more of an issue and is regulated in some way.
Shame Glen that you can read english but not understand the meaning of words and sentences.
Read Howard’s words again and try to understand the meaning and only then should you come back and discuss these and other topics with the adults.
Are you a kid? How old are you?
Using taxpayers’ money for electoral propaganda is grubby, corrupt and deplorable – whoever is doing it. Labor has done it and will do it again. The coalition are taking it to a new low.
Hopefully it will blow up in their faces.
Hopefully the next government will make it illegal (as if…)
An interesting character sketch of Julia Gillard from Heather Ridout in today’s The AFR Magazine October edition (reported at page 27):
“I sort of feel that she actually taps into Australian values and I think she
is quite media savvy. I know when she speaks to business she speaks
very moderately and business gets disappointed when the outcome
isn’t so moderate. She’s quite ‘there’ in terms of public opinion and
she probably is a divisive character in some ways, but she’s popular”.
This might bring a cheer from the Gillard admirers on this blog. Appraisals of a leading figure on one side of politics that are given from a person on the ‘other side’, such as Ridout, are, in my estimation, more often than not going to be closer to the mark about the true qualities of the person under appraisal. It is also a timely reminder to this blog that those on the ‘other side’ are not extremists. They just see things differently to you.
KT,
I enjoy those many Shanahan comments also. I have a feeling that my contribution from this morning is unlikely to make it in so I thought I’d repost it here……..this was in response to Shanahans “article” and the torrent of criticism that usually follows.
“People please, you should all stop telling little Denny how much of an embarrasment he is to the once-proud profession of journalism. You need to understand the psychology at play here. Someone like Dennis has been cheerleading conservatives for so long and rationalising his appalling bias for so long now that he has built a very firm defensive wall in his own mind. If you keep bashing away at that wall by pointing out how shameless his bias is, you will get one of two results. The first would be no change, nor recognition, and an obvious unwillingness to engage in debate for fear of acknowledging that there is substance to such a charge. The other possible outcome is that Dennis’ defensive wall comes crashing down around him – all that would achieve would be the quiet mental self-destruction of a man consumed by an insulated self-delusion. Ultimately, that would do nothing for the state of Australian journalism at all – at the end of the day, this is about ego. The irony is that people like Dennis built their egos through the awe and respect that some (less critical) Australians provided him (and the profeesion) with during his early “career” – a time when journalists were generally worthy of some respect due to the important role they played in our democracy. The irony is that it is that ego that allows Dennis to rationalise his deliberate decision to ignore the howls of SHAME that greet most of his articles. Perhaps the most embarrasingh aspect opf this problem is the fact that Dennis seems quite determined to continue with his shameless Government cheerleading, yet feels he needs to hide behind news limited editors as they defend him in a series of nasty, nameless editorials. A very sad state of affairs that i pray time will solve for us.”
Pauline you think Labor is so high and mighty that they wouldnt be doing the same thing if they were in Government god you must be childish to think so ignorantly my dear lady…its the hypocrisy of politics…Rudd may bang on about advertising being immoral and propaganda but if he’s ever in power do you honestly think he wouldnt do exactly as Howard is doing…you’d have to have rocks in your head to assume he wouldnt do the same…
And Pauline no i am not a kid i am an adult and i act like one on this blog unlike some people who make childish remarks assuming anybody supporting the Liberal Party has to been a kid because they’d be so stupid…that doesnt wash with me dear lady and i believe that once you attack people on baseless childish name calling i think you’ve lost your argument.
Any word on Morgan poll?
Pauline. I asked in another thread if Glen was a kid, but then thought probably not. His level of debate is down there with the standard-issue lib minister.
Arguments saying ‘the other side will do it, so we’ll do it too’ are just childish. I’d like to think we’d all demand both sides of politics don’t waste tax-payers money.
Of course, some ‘information campaigns’ are genuine, but definately not most of them. Also, if we’re looking at efficiency and effectiveness of the use of taxpayers’ funds I’d argue that such high cost advertisements as during the grand finals are not value-for-money.
You have to wonder how the Coalition will be able to object to Labor using tax-payer funded ads should they be elected, and they will eventually. They’re setting the bar pretty high.
In any case this debate has little to do with psephology.
@ 481 David Charles Says:
Because why would your enemies lie about you?
So Glen, it is all right for any future Labor government or any present Labor government to be spending tax payers money to be re- elected?
CTEP
“You have to wonder how the Coalition will be able to object to Labor using tax-payer funded ads should they be elected, and they will eventually. They’re setting the bar pretty high.”
You are right but the ALP have done the same thing as the Coalition in State elections and Federal Labor did it in 1996…so i dont see why Rudd is justified in complaining about it…i had to sit through dozens of Victoria Ads just about how good Victoria is and then ads about Water from Bracks i thinks its highly dubious for any side to make political points out of advertising because they all do it and they are all hypocrites.
For the record, Glen is calling Howard a hypocrite.
Of course but i doubt they help Governments get elected Gary in the end if they are blatantly political or have no informative message then they’ll have more harm than good. Now unless you are going to blanket ban State and Federal which would damage the Government’s ability to inform people about major policy changes that are going to have a big impact on peoples lives like IR, GST, Super i think its a catch 22 you dont like Governments doing it but if they cant tell the people about massive policy changes they arent doing their jobs.
Pauline i never said Howard was a hypocrite there is a difference between advertising that is non-political and informative about policies that wont have any effect on the election and blatant propaganda which is what Keating engaged in…if you are going to call anyone hypocrites my dear lady you should be looking at all your State Premiers who have done worse than Howard…i sat through dozens of ads saying how good Victoria was from the State Government said nothing informative and in SA Mike Rann appears on State Government ads go figure Pauline….
Glen – “and i believe that once you attack people on baseless childish name calling i think you’ve lost your argument.” I hope you remember these words Glen from now on. I won’t do it but I could quote many a post from you where you “lost your argument” through name calling. A lesson learned maybe? One can but hope so.
No sooner do I make a sarcastic comment about the NSW Liberals’ missing candidates, than they are announced – most of them anyway.
* John La Mela, Barton
* Mark Majewski, Blaxland
* Lindsay Paterson, Charlton
* Colin Fowler, Cunningham
* Daniel Caffery, Grayndler
* Krysia Walker, Newcastle
* Lily Arthur, Prospect
* Ronney Oueik, Reid
* Philip Mansour, Watson
* Rose Torossian, Fowler (not at the NSW Libs website yet, but I know she is running)
Still missing: Banks, Shortland, Sydney and Werriwa, plus Batman and Scullin in Vic.
If anyone knows any occupational details about these candidates, please let me know. As in the state election, the Lebanese community is obviously the source of last resort for candidates in unwinnable seats (Oueik, Mansour and Torossian).
Can you recall and relate to me ONE ad Keating ran that supports your contention/argument Glen? Just one.
So if you are Keating or a Labor Premier you are a hypocrite and if you happen to be Howard doing the same thing, it is different, better, worthy and beyond reproach and criticism.
Glen you are a kid with naive propositions like that.
Don’t waste any more time debating this please.
“Under the Federal Labor plan, all government advertising and information campaigns in excess of $250,000 will need to be vetted by the Auditor-General. The Auditor-General would independently apply rules which limit public advertising to essential requirements for public information.
This information will need to be based on policy that has been given explicit legislative and regulatory approval. We’ll also work with the states to develop the same kind of approach around the country.
This is about lifting the standards of government integrity, so taxpayers can have more confidence that their government is working in the public interest, rather than a purely political interest.
Think of all the good things we can do for Australia’s future with the money we save.”
Penny Wong.
Glen do you agree with this Labor Policy?
Think I heard correctly. Howard on ABC wireless speaking on road funding. ” … roads go everywhere.” God, that’s news!
Reminds me of Billy McMahon’s famous: “Everywhere I go, people know that something’s wrong ..”
#485 John Withheld [Because why would your enemies lie about you?]
Because those on the ‘other side’ like Ridout are adversaries to Gillard’s policy positions but they are not necessarily enemies unless personal hatreds come into play.
Morgan has the ALP primary at 54%
What???
Morgan coming out
ALP Primary vote at 54% !!!!!!
Highest Ever under Rudd
http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2007/4217/
looks like it’ll be a phone poll.
Ruawake that still leaves open ads below 250,000 once again looks good but you look at it closer and it fails and who decides what rules the AG will use to determine what is in and whats out…
Pauline once again you have lost an argument for resorting to low based politics by name calling it doesnt serve your side of politics and demeans all those who agree with you i would cease your baseless attacks on me because it ads nothing to political debate and wastes Williams bandwidth.
are you sure? it is early and the site is crashing on me, I can’t confirm this. what does that make the 2pp?
Glen give it up, you have lost any semblance of credibility you ever had with that childish argument
omg I thought you meant 54% for TPP and I was stressed!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks goodness I re-read it, I feel much better, lol, what is TPP?
just from the title
“ALP Primary Vote (54%) At Highest Level Under Rudd”
usally get that first
http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2007/4217/
The headline says:
ALP Primary Vote (54%) At Highest Level Under Rudd
That’s all we have for now, but details will soon follow.
TPP= Two Party Preferred.
Yes, Glen, pack it in. You’ll burst a poopher valve.
I guess my prediction about the Nat vote being on .5% was correct…lol!
tpp prolly something silly like 61:39
Wow!!! Incredible but it has made my day. Bet it won’t be reported.
Glen, I applaud you for your courage in coming here and commenting on bad polls. If it was Labor in this position, I’d stay very far away from blogs.
No it wont because it is probably rogue LV…i hardly think it will rate a mention aside from the fact it shows a trend of the ALP above the 55-45 mark…
@ 497 David Charles Says:
I am intrigued by your original statement and so I will rephrase my question.
Why would you expect a person’s adversaries to NOT misrepresent or mischaracterise that person?
New thread open, so can we please take it over there.
William Bowe
http://www.pollbludger.com