As you’re all no doubt aware, the Prime Minister has just held a press conference announcing the election will be held on November 24. Didn’t hear the whole thing, but after all the justified outrage about the government’s changes to electoral laws, I am surprised to learn that the legal formalities will be conducted on a timetable that will leave the rolls open until October 22.
UPDATE: Those who have had time to think about this point out that the writs will be issued on Wednesday, so the deadline for new enrolments is 8pm that evening. The October 22 date invoked by the Prime Minister is the closing date for amendment to existing enrolments.
UPDATE 2: An AEC press release announces: “If you’re not on the electoral roll and you’re entitled to enrol, you must fill in an enrolment form immediately and return it to an AEC office by 8pm, Wednesday 17 October. If you’re already on the roll but still need to update your address details, to ensure your vote you must complete an enrolment form and return it to an AEC office by 8pm Tuesday 23 October”.
726 Comments
Perhaps now that an election is now called, the public have come to their senses and realise the consequences of changing parties. It allows ample time for more voters to enroll to vote for Howard.
Watching Howard’s speech and particularly the Q&A sessions was like Chinese water torture. The man has no vision and only looked comfortable when attacking Rudd. What sort of leadership is that??? Can’t announce policies for the future, but can happily resort to negative statements about others. Makes my blood boil.
Only 41 days to go.
I’ll post this here, its far more relevant.
Reading the telepathic entrails of Howards speech, I reckon he’s going to ban traditional law everywhere in the country on the grounds of human rights, and use the foreign affairs power to give it constitutional teeth.
It will be an attempt to play well to the Hanson set because the “everyone would be treated the same†line, while he tries to play to the leafy safe government seats with the “increasing the human rights standards†line.
It’ll flow into the Ratty The Uniter spiel.
There’ll be more wedges in this campaign than a golf shop.The reconciliation thing was done for tactical reasons (apart from the leafy vote shoring up) because that’s the way Howard works.I reckon something like this will be one of them – it sounded like he was hinting at something like this with the remarks on indigenous people in todays speech.
And the worst part was when he said that Rudd doesn’t accept responsibility for anything and always blames others. And he thought that made Rudd unsuitable for leadership. So what have we gotten for the last 11 years out of Howard? A continuous stream of avoiding blame on just about everything! Rank hypocrisy.
Good luck everyone
I agree Possum.
It was really a terrible speech. He looked soooo uncomfortable and didn’t want to be answering the questions people were asking him.
Anyone have an idea when Rudd’s press conference will be?
Let the games begin!!!!!!!!!
Ave Imperator!!!Morituri Te Salutant!!!!!!!
Good afternoon tragics and welcome to the campaign.
I think we’re all a bit too worked up, not to say one-sided, to be objective analysts of how the punters will see this speech. No doubt there’ll be a snap opinion poll soon. This will be the big test for The Narrowing theory. Will the voters suddenly say “OMG Labor is a trade union based party! We never knew that!� Well, maybe. We’ll soon find out.
yes possum. you’re right. howard hasn’t even begun inflicting his agenda on this country. wait for workchoices mk 3, stolen generation mk 2, and the complete eradication of land rights.
the revenge of this vindictive little man is not complete. and when he wins, as he will, australians will get what they deserve.
nasty, self-hating little nation, inhabited by people too ashamed to utter the truth of the fear and greed which motivates their every move, every thought and decision. and ruled by the runt that it is its emblem.
the polls are a joke.
howard is a shoo-in.
don’t kid yerselves.
If the youth vote (18-25) is 70% against JWH, why leave the polls open for so long if the intention was to disenfranchise as many as possible first time voters? Is JWH trying to avoid criticism of the “unfair” new electoral laws? Or does he realise he is toast anyway, so let the bloodbath begin? Or is he really Captain Whacky who has a Youtube campaign ready to launch and win back the youth vote?
Us? One-sided? Surely you jest sir!
Well there will be a newspoll out this week. I got polled this morning before the election announcement.
Ave atque vale, o imperator magne! Inter tuos imminet mors!
Watching Howard’s speech and particularly the Q&A sessions was like Chinese water torture. The man has no vision and only looked comfortable when attacking Rudd. What sort of leadership is that??? Can’t announce policies for the future, but can happily resort to negative statements about others. Makes my blood boil.
Probably a better description of Howard’s performance during question is that of an autism sufferer with Tourettes: every response was effectively “Rudd is f*cked”.
(And apologies to all sufferers of autism and Tourettes for besmirching you with Howard!)
Does leaving the electoral role open till the 22 also alow government advertising up to that date or have I just become far too synical? Shorely the latter, right?
William, was wondering what you’d call this post-hole-thingy. ‘One day in November’: simple. Is this an American phrase?
Finally – the END GAME. Shows On! Tis phoney war, no more. Battle stations, etc.
Question of the day:
Q. What percentage of a future Labor frontbench would be ex-union officials?
A. You’re joking aren’t you. JWH only mentioned it 10 times in that boring speech.
I dont think it takes an unobjective mind to see that news conference as cranky and more than a little hesitant. Everything he touches turns to shit now. The desperation is just too obvious for punters to choke down.
I was surprised at this too. I would have thought denying the youth vote as much as humanly possible would be a coalition strategy. But now they’ve given everyone a week to get organised. Could be a mistake.
Yes Adam (8) – I’m worked up. Apologies for that. It’s been too long, and too many years of putting up with this man as PM.
I dont think it takes an unobjective mind to see that news conference as cranky and more than a little hesitant. Everything he touches turns to sh*t now. The desperation is just too obvious for punters to choke down.
When is Rudd speaking?
Blah Blah, Howard is terrible.
The entire Labor strategy has been directed towards minimising the perceived risks of change for the Australian electorate and making it “safe” for people to change the vote in a time when they have clearly grown tired of JWH.
Of course Labor will spin the result but it will be no more than an implicit promise to leave the basic policy settings untouched. Hence WorkChoices will largely stay as will other Howard policies in the event Labor wins. The question will be if they win will KR be able to enforce the position he won on in government?
You can expect Labor to claim it was about WorkChoices or climate change but it will be nothing more exciting than people wanted a change after 12 years. Clearly hugging the Liberal policy positions mean all JWH can run on is the fear of change/ dont risk it etc – shades of PJK indeed. There has been no positive agenda at all from Labor – no Medicare, no accord, no nothing – its Bob Carr Labor in the federal arena.
This will not give Labor any kind of mandate and those who think it does are having themselves on.
Expect large scale disenchantment in Labor’s equivalent of the doctor’s wives, the inner urban school teacher and public servants within 3 years – on the other hand if a win goes to their head expect Whitlam revisited – in which case it will be a 3-5 year government.
I dont think people get the deal with work choices. Howard has introduced the fairness test and ran all these ads etc. But when he was riding high there was no fairness test, no ads explaining it. He told people to get a new job if they got their wages cut. People remember that.
Rudd speaking in Brisbane at 2.15pm
Rudd needs to turn Howards unemployment spiel against him from day 1.
————————————————————————-
“The unemployment rate is low, the quantity of jobs available is exceptional and the government should be congratulated for letting the global boom flow into Australian households via job creation.But now, the challenge facing Australia, the challenge of our times is how to improve the quality of those jobs.Only an education revolution can increase the long term quality of the jobs that will be available to all Australians, only a strong national investment in broadband can allow Australia to generate more 21st century jobs with 21st century wages and income levels.And only tearing up Workchoices can deliver 21st century standards of fairness in the workplace and provide the type of the work/life balance that we’ve all been hearing about for 11 years, but which the government has failed to deliver.
Mr Howard claims that its just the number of jobs that are important, Labor recognises that its not just the quantity, but the quality of those jobs that will deliver rising living standards for all Australians into the 21st century.And only Labor has a plan to bring these new, high paying jobs of the 21st century into the households of AUstralian families.”
—————————————————————————
That sort of spiel, if done well would kill Howards ‘Jobs,Jobs,Jobs’ line stone cold dead.It brings its positioning back to the ALP strong points of infrastructure, education, IR and future vision.It turns the economic into the personal.
Just imagine how many people will try and defraud the AEC between now and the 22nd – that was the given reason for the law change wasn’t it?
Non-core reason?
Just wondering if anyone could enlighten me unto the options left to someone basically moving interstate on election day. Basically going to be in the car dawn till dusk, so is that a good enough excuse for me to lodge some form of postal/absentee ballot?
Cheers!
Now that the race is on perhaps you can all take a step backwards and try and evaluate the two parties. Why does the youth vote seem to have gone to Rudd? Probably because they can’t remember how suffocating it was with Keating and his rainbow coalition of supporters, including most of the so-called intellectuals, especially the losers who run the ABC.
The other point to remember is that the people who will make the decisions mostly live in the suburbs that the Howard haters couldn’t find, let alone go near. They’ve shown they trust Howard in the past, if he can paint Rudd&Co as dangerous lefties, he’s probably still in with a chance.
Nostodamus#1
But didn’t you say,
“The sea will not be passed over safely by those of the Sun, Those of Venus will hold all Africa: Saturn will no longer occupy their realm, And the Asiatic part will change.”?
This appears to totally contradict your post.
16 ESJ
The reason doesn’t really matter does it?
The fact that there are so many different reasons, and that they are different for each demographic and location.
Death by a thousand wedges?
At last !! Let the games begin!
Thought the Rodent looked very uneasy at the beginning of the confrence, not his usual cocky self on such occasions.
Nostro you’re going to be sooo disappointed on election night, this is’nt 96, 01 or 04, this is 72, 83 and 93 rolled into one .
41 day and counting indeed !
Obvious themes for the next 6 weeks will be
Negative Campaign
1. 70% union officials in Labor party
2. Wall to wall labor governments
3. Inexperienced team/uncertainty
Positive Campaign
1. Experience & team leadership
2. Unemployment with a “three” in front of it (note that he gave a firm commitment to this aka interest rates in 2004)
I can picture the TV adverts now
Boring!!! I hope the next 6 weeks on this blog isn’t going to be the same emotional rantings as today. Does anybody have anything sensible to say or are we just all going to go on all day about how horrible Howard is? I’m not voting for Howard but it would be nice to see some well thought out comments instead of what we’ve had all morning.
Possum,
You of all people should try to keep your head above the fray and provide some in depth analysis instead of just trying to think up campaign slogans and ideas for ads.
missed the date for close of nominations. anybody know?
21 Trav
http://www.aec.gov.au/Voting/ways_to_vote/
“Early vote
Electors can cast an early vote in person or by post in the following two ways.
A pre-poll vote is cast before election day at a pre-poll voting centre. A postal vote is cast before election day by post. These types of votes can be cast by an elector who will not be within their home State or Territory on election day, is seriously ill, infirm, unable to leave work, or for religious reasons is unable to attend a polling place.
At the last election there were 516,458 postal votes cast. This represented approximately 3.96 per cent of the total number of votes.
The AEC must wait 13 days after election day to receive postal votes before counting can be finalised. This ensures that electors in remote areas and overseas are not disenfranchised.”
ESJ you right-wingers are still delusional after all this time.
The Labor party could not believe its luck the day JwH announced “WorkChoicesâ€. As Drop By has previously posted here before, “WorkChoices†is one of the longest suicide notes in political history, the other being “Fight Backâ€
Bye, Bye John Winston Howard.
paul k – I suggest you visit Possum’s site, Antony’s ABC site and (he added modestly) my site, for all your intelligent news and comment needs. With due respect to William, his liberal approach to content means that this blog is going to be mostly nyah-nyah-nyah for the next six weeks.
I don’t like either side much, but I thought Howard performed pretty well, actually.
Certainly his speech at the start was 100% on message, thumping home Coalition positives, no extraneous references – one ‘climate change’ the only time he gave a Labor issue air – and if he can stay that focussed for six weeks he should certainly be able to shore up his base. Sounds like there might be some ‘mortgage relief’ type stuff forthcoming. Focus will be on economy/cost of living and ‘the right leadership’ which sounds like the core line for the campaign.
I think his unemployment spiel will not have much impact though. The people whose employment prospects will be damaged by Labor’s IR policy are mostly in safe Labor seats – ergo their votes are irrelevant. Plus they probably don’t know enough about policy to understand the potential for it to harm them.
Expecting lots of ‘fresh’, ‘future’, ‘forward-looking’ etc from Kevvie.
Writs close Oct 17, so people enrolling will only have until 8pm that night to get on to roll.
Paul K, unemployment is Howards only link between the abstract concept of economic management and the actual lives of pundits that is still seen by those punters in a favourable light.
If the framing of that relationship turns negative for Howard, the entire real world connection between Howards biggest strength and punters perceptions shatters.
If that happens, the entire Coalition campaign disintegrates.
That’s why I expect Rudd to take that angle.
Then Adam, we must all ensure that the level of discussion here is worthy of us.
What is it with the Australian press??? Every swinging dick knew there was going to be an election called today. You would think that they could have had it miked properly. All it does is make Howard seem more authoritarian and he could answer the question anyway he wanted too and not be seen to be avoiding the questions. The yanks are much better than this.
I see Mumble, Ozpolitcs and Possum were all posted in real time on this. What a bunch of tragics we all are on a our Sunday morning. Still it’s going to be a memorable ride especially if it ends in a change of government.
25 paul k
I’m interested in the coalition idea that this will focus change.
To me this does make some sense – if people are basically conservative, but not particularly principled in their intentions then I can see a drift.
Those swingers, however, are going to barbecues and attending Christmas parties where there’s a majority of ALP support (according to the polls) and in fact the majority is even higher for the majority of working Australia. This tends to suggest that the deciding sheep may flock with the herd?
Possum,
Thanks for pointing out the bleeding obvious. I’ve only heard all these arguments 8000 times.
I’ll think I’ll take Adam’s advise and go elsewhere until emotions cool down. Somewhere there’s got to be a site with serious comment.
20 seats only, a majority of 6 or 4 whoever you look at the independents. He will retain bennelong but then resign losing it in the bi-election.
Tassie2, Victoria2, SA 3-4, WA2, NT1, NSW5, Q5.
The bookies would agree too.
thats an ALP win of course
Funny to see all the party hacks overruning the news ltd blog sites. Mostly from the Liberal party, mind you. Methinks the Young Libs have been given marching orders to step up the blog war, so as to give a false sense of public opinion.
So – the first question is – if the Newspoll on Tuesday is 55/45 or 54/46, does Howard have the early “momentum” in this campaign?
Edward StJohn: “This will not give Labor any kind of mandate and those
who think it does are having themselves on.”
As demonstrated many times in the past, “mandate” is measured by
“bums on seats”.
Well, here we go.
41 days = 6.8 weeks. An almost 7 week campaign is a relatively long one (at least as far as I can remember. I’m happy to be proved wrong on this one). A suppose that a longish campaign will give the coalition enough time to attempt to sure up support in marginals.
The question I put to the forum is: “could this long campaign strategy back fire?”. Will the average punter appreciate almost 7 weeks of letterbox drops, door knocking and TV ads? Will it turn them off the incumbent? Or will it give the coalition a chance to solidify support in marginals?
From the point of view of smaller political parties (Greens!), I think a longer campaign is better, as it allows more time for us to rise through the general chatter of the two party federal campaign and connect with voters, who we would probably miss in a shorter campaign. However, I suppose it could also lead to a dilution of the protest vote, as people’s anger at certain policies does diminish over time.
Anyhow, I’ll stop musing now. Enjoy the campaign everybody!
Does anyone have a link to a web address where you can see the Howard press conference?
Paul K
I suggest a box of De Witt’s Liver Pills. Sounds like you need a good splurge.
Went to Government House lookout this morning to see Howard drive up. Very exciting to think this time in 6 weeks it might be all over (please!).
Perhaps we may get the Galaxy leaked tonight to rain on Howard’s parade? (Again… please!)
This campaign isn’t changing my vote and I won’t be listening to a word Howard has to say. He’s had 11 years to convince me to vote for him, why should 6 weeks make a difference?
Socrates, not sure how long the whole conference was, but here’s an excerpt at least:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22581572-5012863,00.html
Trav at 21
You can pre poll vote. The AEC usually have two temporary pre poll polling places in each electorate 2 weeks out from polling day. You can also apply for a postal vote. Applications are generally sent out by both parties by direct mail during the campaign. Pre polling is probably the preferred option.
Still government advertising all over the place.
Chris C,
I think it is 5.8 weeks not 6.8
Here we go, ladies and gentlemen. This campaign is either going to be very boring or very interesting. That’s my call.
> I am surprised to learn that the legal formalities will be conducted on a timetable that will leave the rolls open until October 22.
Well if confirmed I wouldn’t be surprised. My understanding (subject to confirmation) is contrary to the narrative over the last few months. I always thought that the writs were *always* issued some days after the visit to the GG, so closing the polls on the day of the writs wasn’t a problem *unless* the PM went for the shortest campaign possible (which leads to the writs being issued almost immediately)
Now that Howard has been forced – by the old man’s own dithering – to announce the only realistic date about 2 weeks earlier than necessary, he gets “the full benefit of the views of younger voters”.
As they say:- couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
“after all the justified outrage about the government’s changes to electoral laws, I am surprised to learn that the legal formalities will be conducted on a timetable that will leave the rolls open until October 22″
don’t get too excited. I hate to suggest that our Prime Minister would be at all misleading in his public statements, but I think you’ll find that if you aren’t yet enrolled, you have until 8pm Wed 17th, the day the writs are to be issued. An additional 3 working days are made available if you’re turning 18 or becoming a citizen between the issue of writs and the election, so the rolls don’t completely close out until Monday.
But if you’re young, and you thought Mr Howard suggested that you had until Monday 22nd, you may just be out of luck. By my reading, you need your form to be with the AEC on Wenesday. Get out there, and enrol tomorrow.
AEC rules:
http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/Fact_Sheets/Close_of_Rolls.htm
39, Sinic:
Seeing the hacks out in force is quite amazing. Despite it being a little painful to read, for each one of them spending their time butting heads online, it’s one less Liberal out on the campaign trail doing something productive like door knocking or something. It’s no wonder they can’t get the volunteer numbers to hand out pamphlets or man the booths.
I’m expecting someone to rig the voting counter, too.
Nice to see Howard portraying himself as a leader who always takes full responsibility. You could almost hear the belly laughs coming from all over Australia.
What a pity none of the journalists thought to ask him about the AWB fiasco when he and all his ministers developed collective amnesia and like Schultz in Hogan’s heroes insisted they knew NOOOOTHING.
I assume we don’t go into formal “caretaker mode” until Parliament is actually dissolved. So the government ads will run until then.
Voting: if you are going to be away from home, but within your own state, on polling day, you can vote “absentee” at any polling booth. If you are going to be interstate, you can only vote at the booths designated for that purpose. The booth at the town hall in the capital city is always available for interstate voters. Otherwise you would be better to pre-poll. Pre-polling opens I think two weeks before election day. Ring your MP’s office to find out where the pre-poll booth is in your seat, or check the AEC website.
I see ESJ is pumping the old “mandate” chestnut. I reckon 100+ seats might just give Labor the appropriate numbers to govern in the name of all Australians despite the protestations of our Tory friend.
As for the Libs, I look forward to the day in twenty or so years when my grandchild, after listening to me again retell the story of how we did over the Liberal Government in 2007, asks me, “What is a Liberal?”
Hubris, I’ll be soaking in it!
you already are GG!
16
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 12:51 pm
This will not give Labor any kind of mandate and those who think it does are having themselves on….
….
Hi ESJ. This is not a statement deeply imbued with the spirit of democracy and it is not the kind of sentiment that will win support for Team Blue.
The normal thing is, if you win, you can implement your program. If you abuse the trust placed in you, the voters will have the chance to rebuke you for it, as His Ozzines The Grump of Kirribilli is about to find out.
So is parliament sitting tomorrow and Tuesday?
A ‘mandate’ is a combined non-coalition control of the senate.
Charlie,
Yes/No/Probably/No one seems to know!
This election will be different from Howards previous ones.
In all of those Howard has stated ‘This election will be about blah blah blah” and the labor party and others meekly followed.
This time labor will not fall for that and neither will most of the voters, this election will be about whatever the people and the labor party want it to be.
No doubt the collective geniuses in the Liberal strategy bunker have considered it, but this date will be very inconvenient to many tertiary students and some final year high school students old enough to vote. Why? Not because it interferes with exams, but because for most it will disrupt the start of their holidays. I would imagine that will be annoying.
Perhaps seeing the reported 73/27 anti-government vote amongst the young the Liberals have written this group off. Then again perhaps they’re hoping that those at the beach will not bother filling in an absentee vote.
Glen!
at last – how are you now that the race is on? You must be quietly confident that 60% of people polled so far are just plain wrong.
re Adam’s post@52
Is this the reason for the election time table so the Liberal party adds
funded by the tax payers can continue a little longer?
I consider the govt is Now in caretaker mode and the adds should
stop now
GG,
It doesnt really matter if Labor wins 60,90,120,150 seats. The point is who is going to change anything?
Its not a reformist agenda, its a conservative agenda that Labor has.
Whether its Labor or Liberal it will still be a conservative, mediocre consensus in Australian politics. I doubt very much (contrary to JWH’s line) that much of anything will change under Labor. If you have a sense of history that confirms the extent to which JWH has won the culture wars.
BO -
What mandate? What agenda?
No. Parliament has been, or will be, prorogued.
A question about enrollment. My partner finally moved out of his parents place today. Now by the time the election is called it would be over a month after he moved out, but that’s not the case at the moment. Where does he stand in relation to this?
“Parliament will be prorogued at 12 noon tomorrow” = No sitting.
ESJ ,
I’m not sure that some of your brothers-in arms would agree that it doesn’t matter whether it is 60 or 150 seats, given that the more they lose by the longer they are likely to be consigned to the proverbial wilderness. Not to mention the alarming fact that they may end up with Sophie Mirrabellas as leader, as one of the only 2 or so members left.
I’ll be happy with 100 seats or so, just to keep things interesting.
xx
Well, we know one thing, Costello was on the money when he gave the game away, re election timing, twice in the last couple of weeks.
Sorry to persist, but again, can anyone post a link to where JH’s press conference can be seen on the net?
thanks
Gary Bruce – true. Was he just trying to annoy Howard I wonder? Still being a petulant underling?
Edward StJohn: “This will not give Labor any kind of mandate and those who think it does are having themselves on.â€
Howard is the classic flip-flopper (ie hypocrite) on the legitimacy of ‘mandates’. He declared many years ago, when in opposition of course, that the mandate theory of politics is dead. Only to claim a mandate (more than once, if I remember correctly,) when in government.
Furthermore, Howard ran a small target, dont-scare-the-punters, me-too campaign in 96, yet went on to make some big changes.
And where was his mandate for WorkChoices? He didn’t mention it prior to winning the 04 election.
Edward – “Whether its Labor or Liberal it will still be a conservative, mediocre consensus in Australian politics. I doubt very much (contrary to JWH’s line) that much of anything will change under Labor.”
So Edward there is no problem for people like yourself voting Labor then, right?
I hope that nonsense brings you some comfort, ESJ.
Removing Howard’s authoritarian penalties on collective bargaining will represent major change, even in the Workchoices-lite paradigm.
Plus you’ll swiflty see how shallow the culture war victories were – and how they were essentially a product of federal bullying, not conversion.
Expect a national apology within weeks, the instant abolition of Howardite neo-con foreign policy, a return to constructive multilaterialism, signing up to Kyoto 2, and a reprioritisation of public education.
Howard is so reactionary and outdated, Ruddite centrism will appear quite progressive, and capture the public imagination for at least two terms.
By that point, any liberal leader in the Howard mould will be completely unelectable.
Howard’s press conference was a poor one – their messages are all over the place.
A quick look at the Fairfax and news networks and the key themes being reported are:
“right” leadership – which naturally brings in questions on the leadership changeover. A few questions on this have already been asked this morning, and the responses have been very average.
full employment – naturally brings in workchoices, again a question was asked on that point straight away.
balance and union bosses – as others have said, this is about preaching to the converted. It’s not a vote turner in itself.
There is nothing here that resonates the way it did when he came out in 2004 and asked “who do you trust on interest rates”. There was no overarching theme which he can bang on about until everyone is sick of hearing it, and then bang on about it some more.
In contrast, Rudd’s “new leadership on climate change, education and states” is resonating. The Coalition will lose badly if they can’t put together something more coherent.
I agree with Possum that there will be a number of left field announcements. However, in my view indigenous issues are now too muddied by JWH’s recent speech to have a net benefit for the Coalition.
I think history will look back at this campaign as the people have stopped listening to Howard. There is no fervent desire for Rudd at all, if anything he’s a clean skin who is not rocking the boat. As a result it doesn’t really matter what straws the LNP cling to, the mud the throw, the wedges they ply next opinion poll from whoever is shock horror 56:44 2pp.
This government has had it’s day and there is nothing Rudd can do about it.
But why? From a conservative, boring, selfish and apathetic electorate like Australia (thankyou Peter hartcher and mukole(9)) would we ever change a government in “such good times”
Good times for some – particularly those that listen to AM radio (ie oldies, self funded retires etc….) – refer to the voting demographics.
For the rest of us is the economic factor – higher interest rates and mortgages longer work hours with less conditions and job security – all in the name of flexibility (atleast for the proletariat and middle classes).
The other side is the moral question – which is why the people “Loathe you more than they Like you ” Mr. PM . – 55% dissapprove cf 45% approve.
We know what you stand for – Iraq, AWB, WMD and a right conservative agena – the pendulum has swung the other way (from the extreme right to the right) and the bell tolls for thee..
I’m calling it now – It is all over!! Labor by 30 seats – the next six weeks is just going through the motions and a silly charade.
My fingers are crossed for Tuesday’s newspoll, the government needs a 2-3% increase in primary vote to make this a close election…and no Jen i do not feel good i am sick today no doubt Rudd’s ‘Anything he can do i can do better’ speech will no change my current level of health…
The Liberal Party website has some negative and positive ads on and just as everyone predicted they are going to do an L plate Rudd campaign…
http://www.liberal.org.au/
I only caught some of the questions from the press gallery and not Howard’s speech but for a goal of full employment that is a good message to bang on about because the economy is the Coalition’s biggest plus.
No doubt Rudd will bang on about IR, Global Warming how he is a fiscal conservative, how old Howard is ect…same old Labor.
Sorry, 5.8 weeks. Typo…
Socrates, go to The Daily Telegraph site. There is a link there.
Rudd will be forced out of any attempt to replicate Howard’s neo-conservatism by The Greens getting more in the Senate – a likely vote for those who are not impressed with Me-Too but are desperate to see the end of Howard and his cromies.
This one sentence might be Howard’s own undoing – “Love me or loathe me, you know where I stand”. People will be thinking environment, IR and other things they have been slow on.
Culture Wars? Don’t make me laugh!
One thing is for certain, there will not be an award winning musical written about Howard.
In fact, Howard legacy will be quickly forgotten as Labor takes control of the agenda.
The reason is that the Libs just don’t do History very well.
Edward StJohn (63)
I agree that it is indeed a conservative agenda on both sides. As an (amateur) student of political philosophy I find the detachment of both sides from any meaningful debate on ideas dissappointing. Nevertheless, that thinking carries with it an implication that is also why I think the Liberals are in such danger.
If the economic settings are not going to change much under either side, then economics ceases to be a reason to vote for the Liberals. Then it is back to issues like social services, equity, environment etc where Labor would probably feel favoured to win.
Even more extreme, if it is not about issues at all, then people will simply vote on perception and/or prejudice. In that case, if Howard is perceived (accurately in my view) as dishonest, then he is probably gone. Given his failure to honor his promise to Costello, no interest rate rises promise, and non-core promises of the past, there is ample scope for Labor to attack him on character and honesty.
ESJ@63. I suspect you’re right. Kev and the boys aren’t going to throw this away by turning 180 degrees in their first year. Seems to me it’s like turning a big ship. The change of direction starts slow and gathers pace. The trick is to correct the steering before the turn’s halfway through or you end up in a place where you won’t survive because your “fellow Australians” haven’t followed. Suspect that’s where Howard has ended up (thanks Workchoices) and he’s leaning on the wheel, trying to avoid the iceberg.
Rudd speech coming on the ABC.
Rudd’s on telly now
St Edward @ 16
Ahahahhahahaahhahaha, Sour Grapes already mate???
Yeah make excuses moron, people don’t vote out governments during economically prosperous times due to it being “old”, they vote them out because of junk policies such as “Workchoices”
Don’t make excuses for your failures, your ignorance got you lot into this situation in the first place, only have yourselves to blame now!
Will, from memory, I think that you have to have lived at a particular address for the set period of time (a month I’m pretty sure) before enrolling there. So you’re partner could enrol at his new address before the rolls close if he’s been there for a month.
“New leadership” logo !!
Hmmm. Intersting one. Have to refelct on this…. up front thoughts: really focuses it back on Rodent himself, which is good; only slight negative is the association with Keating’s pitch!
Rudd’s on ABC TV, News Radio….
For anyone interested – if you break down these Taverner swings by seat using the 2006 census data, 19 seats go with Parramatta the first and Kooyong the last with Dunkley, the 20th a dead heat.
Only another 41 Rodent days to go before the stench finally lifts.
At last….
Been looking forward to this for ages, despite there being no real difference. The economy…. Outside governments control. Health, education… Rudd will be a little less centralist, but his history doesn’t indicate a growth of public sector so no real change in these areas. Safe for a change really.
I reckon the electorate is picking this up and is focusing on Howards perceived arrogance. It’s almost as though it’s waiting for him to apologise, but as we all know sorry is the hardest word to say, so maybe Howard might have better luck with these words… TAMPA, Iraq, Workchoices, AWB.
Whatever, have fun and roll n democracy, just watchout for the Stokes and Packers of the world…
Anybody think “new leadership” is a theme of the ALP?
Decent speech – general stuff, but Rudd is speaking confidently.
Cliched crap.
Is this guy honestly the best we can do ?
Drover’s Dog syndrome sadly.
I think we will see the two leaders running two quite different campaigns.
Kevin Rudd will be off on his new ideas, new leadership, finally take action on global warming, fix up hospitals and junk those IR laws.
John Howard will be stressing his experience and the safety of staying with the devil we know.
Trouble is for him more and more voters are seeing him as a devil.
The momentum is just so great now for a change, I think it will simply gather pace.
There’s little reason for people NOT to vote for Kevin Rudd, apart from the Greens.
He’s a conservative, he won’t rock the boat, he won’t make any drastic changes to our lifestyles.
This is shaping up to be a catastrophic election for the Coalition.
Liberals are beginning to wish that Peter Costello had had the guts to challenge John Howard. It might have been a very different election then.
Peter Costello could have announced significant changes to the IR laws and other measures to me-too Kevin Rudd.
I really can’t see John Howard and the Coalition clawing back enough votes in the next six weeks. It would be a gargantuan task even for a new and younger leader.
It will be interesting too see what sort of strategies the Coalition adopts to firewall their seats on 6-8% margins.
No doubt they will write off most of those below 3%-4% and throw the hapless incumbents to the wolves.
Even with protection strategies for the 6-8% seats, there are bound to be local outbreaks in seats with even higher margins.
It is likely the Coalition does not have the resources the protect all its vulnerable seats when so many are at risk.
Why would donors want to throw money at a losing party? It might prove counterproductive over the next few years.
They would be better advised to back the party most likely to win.
Labor has waited nearly long 12 years for payback and no doubt there will be payback if they win.
The changes to be made by Kevin Rudd might be quite Whitlamesque and surprising.
He will need to gain enough seats in the Senate together with the Greens and maybe a Democrat to be truly effective, otherwise we may be going to the polls again in another 15 months.
Look how the Greens did in the Qld by-election – a huge vote – compared with Family First and One Nation.
That is an indicator of how well they may do in in both the House of Reps and the Senate.
Don’t be surprised to see the Greens win one or more lower house seats.
If the polls are so far out in favour of Kevin Rudd on the day, many people will feel comfortable about checking him with a Greens vote.
Now that will be interesting.
Possum, I think Rudd read your post.
Its a good pitch, three simple themes, each of which is positive, but undermines Howard’s complacent assertions of progress.
Im not big on the ‘leadership’ theme, myself, on the ‘pawking meter’ principle, but maybe it’ll play well.
The major points are clear though – thats important. I had no clear sense what Howard was putting forward.
Hey, he’s ramping it up! He’s gone the biff on Howard’s negative campaigning history!! Yeah!
Not a bad speech, got better toward the end…..
Wish he hadn’t knocked the microphones and made the 1 year fluff up!
“New leadership” mentioned fifteen times in his speech.
new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership new leadership, new leadership
Wow Kevin something original how about inexperienced leadership…i dont consider it a fear campaign to say Rudd has been a leader for less than 1 year and doesnt understand how our economy works…
Rudd was all over the place he wants to do 101 things in his first term ill do this and that and that and this its just like Whitlam…
Bring on Gillard! We need some entertainment!
Where have they been hiding Combet, and the many other union bosses?
He got better at the end.
Why did the ABC cut off Rudd’s address when he was about to respond to questions?
That’s not cricket.
Grrr who told us Rudd would be on at 2.30? I missed it.
So the ABC shows Howard’s election announcement in full but Kevin Rudd’s no… yep the ABC is certainly biased these days and Channel Nine shows Howard’s announcement but not a piece of Kevin Rudd’s reply…
Interesting to see how the international media are covering….
CNN
“War ally Australia sets election date”
“The results could see one of the United States’ staunchest remaining allies in Iraq lose power to the anti-war opposition.”
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/10/13/australia.elections/index.htm
BBC
The poll is also expected to decide whether Australia starts bringing home its troops from Iraq.
Mr Howard’s unflinching support for US President George W Bush has proven unpopular with many Australian voters, our correspondent says .
The war and the refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on climate change have found Mr Howard on the wrong side of public opinion, he says.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7043619.stm
The ABC has a policy of giving exactly equal time to the majors and equivalent time to minors. They will be monitoring it by the second.
What Kevin Rudd loses now he will make it later, same for John Howard. The rules have changed now the election has been called.
The part on education was really passionate and gave me a fuzzy feeling inside.
Basically he was saying he wouldn’t be where he is today without a good education and that humans need the best education they can to excel in life.
Glen,
it beats
“trust me . I’ve been at best mediochre and at worst diabolical for 11 years”
I thought it was strong and clear. Importantly, he just looked better than Howard. Superficial impressions count for a lot.
Rudd’s was certainly far more upbeat than Howards. Peter Hartcher nailed Howard’s pathetic effort.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/federal-election-2007/bpeter-hartcherb/2007/10/14/1192300579701.html
“This country does not need new leadership, this country does not need old leadership. It needs the right leadership”
Sick burn Mr Howard that will teach Rudd to say new leadership 15 times…
A good speech by Rudd, only criticism I would make, when he was talking about Workchoices he should have made the point that the Liberals will talk about how they are the small business party yet their actions have shown they don’t stand for small business and these are why
1-GST red tape
2-Lack of investing in skills for workers
3-Workchoices red tape.
otherwise I give him a 7/10
Election is on but Libs still haven’t found a candidate for Banks.
I guess they will end up selecting Mr Mansour snr, even though he is of middle eastern appearance.
Rudd was nervous at the start but he got better..
Far better than Howard (but I’m biased), Howard’s was full of scare tactic stuff… but not much else..
liked it when he was asked about which Australian’s
are missing out… could not answer it other than i think aboriginal people…
and the New Leadership slogan.. just perfect… much better than Howard’s scary leadership view…
Well those shredders in Barton on Friday night weren’t working overtime for nothing!
Election is on. Finally.
To Rudd’s credit this is a solid, but not spectular response. Certainly no clarion call to rally the troops – quite forgettable, but more than enough to get the job done.
A presidential start from both. If leadership’s the issue, the libs must be made to sweat the handover of power “late in the next term”. I think the head to head leader approach is a huge tactical error for Howard. Labor must exploit it every day.
The think that struck me most about Howard’s diatribe was his obvious resentment of Rudd’s popularity and vision. The old Rodent knows he’s gone for sure, won’t last the distance.
Rudd had a dig at Crosby/Textor in his last question. hehe
‘Broadband’ started slowly but came back strong in the end
Woah! Nailed Howard on the “taking responsiblity” nonsense. Nice sound bite.
So, I guess the “new leadership” theme is to innoculate against the inexperience fear campaign.
Good effort all round Ruddster.
To Rudd’s credit, a solid but not spectacular performance. Certainly no clarion call to rally the troops – but good enough
Richard Jones..
What rubbish.. this is important day in the campaign and both parties should have been given full coverage… sorry in view the ABC is now right wing biased… and i am not sure how you measure coverage time… is it in minutes… fair dinkum talk about being trivial…
The Ruddster does it again! 10/10
New leadership = Inexperienced leadership…
Looks like the Labor PR team made their first stuff up…
how about aspirational leadership?
OMG…. 42 days to go…get me a Bex!
Marky Rudd probably didnt want his questions televised after all there would be questions over his inexperience his front bench’s inexperience and his lack of economic policies who’d want the public to see that?
Don’t be picky people. Rudd really nailed that. He’s the man for the times.
Incentivational leadership!
and Bold, Visionary Leadership…
Generic leadership!
Wow, surprising Ruddock didn’t like Rudd speech.
I’ve never liked Ruddock, i look forward to him reduced to being a house husband.
“Darling, will you put the bins out?”
“In relation to that matter, I will put the bins out at the appropriate time as part of my obligations as a husband.”
Yeah, very obvious pro-Howard bias from the ABC. I guess the conservatives on the board are now running the news department.
Good stuff from Rudd, nothing earth shattering, but it still contrasted well with a tired, old and increasingly irrelevant looking Howard.
Glen, I guess we’re in for 6 weeks of baiting and negativity from your good self!
Glen,
Rudd made a very good point, where in Howard’s speech did he mention a plan for the future, afterall that is what Elections are about.
Glen, Sky News televised it, so that rips in to your argument. I think the ABC are back to programming as usual. In fact, Rudd didn’t squirm like Howard in answering questions.
So the first scare in this campaign is based on inexperienced leadership… Negative Glen at his best..
The long campaign is designed to run down Rudd, put him under sustained pressure and see if he cracks.
Howard looked pained at times like an uler is eating into him. Rudd looked nervous – he will do everything to stay on message – because it’s worked so far, minimise risk to avoid the above senario.
Trouble for Howard is, voters have made up their minds on WorkChoices and Howard’s yesterdays leader and looks more like a mean old dotty grandfather with high pants and a smelly cardgian
What like the baiting and negativity that ive been forced to endure for this whole year because of the polls…hypocrisy comes to mind HH…no i wont be negative…because i dont see telling people how inexperienced Rudd is is a negative thing to say it is fact…but also Howard has a lot of positive messages to tell the people…we have a good economic record…why risk it with Rudd and Swan…
I heard the questions on News Radio. K-RUD answered well. I like the one about 70% of the other mob not wanting Howard as leader.
Does Glen have enough experience to comment on Rudd’s lack of experience?
I also noticed in questions Rudd picked up on the point of who would be treasurer under Costello if PM. He raised Downer with a hint of scepticism.
How is trying to achieve full employment not a vision for the future…god what are you all on?
Ruddock will retire no doubt.. and spend more time with Amnesty telling us all how much he cares about Human Rights… (cough)…
It is sad that for the most part the Liberal party has lots its classical liberal principles but nonetheless it stands for individual liberty and enterprise more than Labor.
It makes me cringe when I hear Labor talking about the “education revolution”. The federal government can’t bring about an education revolution, or any kind of revolution to social services, other than putting money in and taking money away.
Sigh.
Why can’t the Liberals say that they’re the party of individual responsibility and believe in education freedom, health freedom, tax freedom, all of that, and leave it up to individuals to do as they please?
A great effort by Rudd. He’ll nail Howard, of that I have no doubt now.
Ruddock is looking old. Perhaps they didn’t give him any makeup, but if the government wants to do themselves a favour they need to put younger fresher looking people on the screen.
Actually, on a serious note about experience.
I have worked with plenty of people who have, on the surface, had many, many years of experience, but who were far, far worse at their jobs than new comers.
In one memorable occasion with a 22 year old grad who ran circles around a 60 year old PhD graduate.
So experience doesn’t actually mean a great deal to me….
Glen’s weak responses also convince me that that was a good very response by Rudd.
Aesop – Says:
I think that described Rudd’s effort all year (apart from his speech when he was first made leader). It also describes Howard in 1996.
Rudd is in front and is forcing Howard to make the running and the mistakes. Its a subtle balancing act that he has executed well all year – from the vunerable position of facing a govt with control of both houses and a significant slab of the media.
Now the playng field is more level. I am looking foward to when the ALP gets on the front foot. The third party – grass roots attacks will be a feature along with the viral quick response attacks.
Just like it didnt for Latham?
Howard needs to talk about his team compared with Labors…its a no brainer that Howard has the better team and one that isnt made up of 70% Union officials…
According to the experience argument, you have to have been PM to be elected one. It’s nonsense. Rudd was DG of the Qld Cabinet Office at the age of 34. Yes, Glen. He must be a real mug.
#142 “How is trying to achieve full employment not a vision for the future…god what are you all on?”
We all want full employment. A vision should give us a clue on how get/keep it.
Given Howard’s last election promise on interest rates surely a vote for Howard means a vote for higher unemployment.
Make that “very good response” Shee.
Marky Marky, well we just have to wait and see during the election. I think it would be highly unlikely that the ABC will be biased to one side or the other. Think about it. What do they have to gain? Bias is very often perceived than real.
One of the first things that will be happen after the election, if Kevin Rudd wins, will be a shake up of the ABC board, I would think.
I see emotions are running high here!
Glen, on the economic record, Peter Costello has a giant surplus yet health, education etc are starved of funds. That’s not good economics.
Good times don’t last for ever and we need to ensure we survive a downturn which will inevitably come.
Actually Damien you are wrong…
“According to the experience argument, you have to have been PM to be elected one.”
You need to be Opposition leader for more than 1 year probably 2 or 3 years and it would be better to have faced an election…Rudd has done neither and so he is not experienced enough to run the country…
Glen,
Why?
“Glen, on the economic record, Peter Costello has a giant surplus yet health, education etc are starved of funds. ”
Richard why arent you attributing any blame to the States why is it always the Howard Government who is to blame for State issues?
never mind Glen’s experience argument, it’s just his polite way of acknowledging Howard as old and tired and Rudd as young and visionary
Glen, If Howard was serious about full employment why have 750,000 (630,000 in 96) sitting on DSP, due to the way Howard has run disability services these people are greatly restricted with the only people benefit go by the name Theasa Rein aka Rudd’s wife.
I’m sorry but Howard is a narrow mined negaitive leader who for all his experiance has sadly little going for him.
Last week Insiders had two right wingers on and everyone screamed “bias”. Today they had two lefties on and no one said a word. The ABC is not biased. They’re trying to be even handed and occasionally making mistakes but overall they do not have any of the bias we see so often in the Murdoch media organisation.
# 142 – Sexual freedom, Michael?
A copy of a complaint I just made to the ABC as they cut off Kevin Rudd’s press conference. If you wish to complain call 8333 1500 in Sydney. I had to wait 5 Minutes as the switchboard is jammed.
“I wish to complain about your coverage of the Election Speeches of the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader.
While the Prime MInisters press conference was covered in full with questions from the press, The opposition leaders was cut short after his prepared speech. This denied me the opportunity to see the oppositiuon leader answer questions from the press and rebut the Prime Ministers assertions at his press conference.
This is appalling bias on the part of the ABC which is supposed to be a neutral and apolitical organi.sation.
This letter is a formality as I intend to make a strenuous complaint to the Australian Broadcasting Authority and have been informed that I must make a complaint in writing to your organisation first.
I am utterly disgusted and offended by this blatant political Bias shown by the ABC.”
Please register your disgust as I am sure the majority of people who contribute to this blog will.
Watching Howard’s announcement, my seven-year-old son said, “Dad, why is John Howard crying?”
Face it, Glen. Howard’s ego, together with the yes-men flunkies he’s now surrounded by, were seduced by the prospect of one more personality based campaign. The problem is, Howard’s a pillar of salt even in his own party. Who seriously believes Downer, Abbot and that twerp Nelson are in 2009 simply going to roll over and say to Cozzie “give it to me, baby”.
Glen, I am not saying the States are being managed as well as they can. I’m talking about the huge vertical fiscal imbalance which must be addressed. It’s a bit like my wife piling up a huge credit card debt and paying interest on it while I have a giant pile of cash in my account. It just doesn’t make sense.
The Howard Government supposedly runs the whole of Australia and this includes responsibility for adequate funding for health and ecuation.
They don’t receive tax money just to squirrel it away.
Of course the States can be better managed, so can the Federal Government. There is always room for improvement.
My view is that Nick Greiner was a far better manager of New South Wales than Morris Iemma. He really did manage.
We could do with a few more like him. Of course he is now earning more than a million dollars a year in the private sector.
Kleenex tissues has announced they will be sponsoring the “41 boxes for 41 days Glen Support fund”.
All money raised will go towards buying the 41 boxes of tissues Glen will need to wipe his eyes with every day as he watches his heroes go down with the ship.
And dont we need a debt convoy these days?
Glen we’ve had this States at fault rubbish all year.
The Feds have the money, more than ever (pick any measure you want), and yet inexplicably they are providing 30 year lows to the States (as a proportion of GDP), and you want us to blame the States for everything that goes wrong.
What would be the stupidest thing you could do in this circumstance. It would be to insert local boards to govern hospitals so that there is an extra level of potential stuffup and blame, and extra layer of expense and public service. Desperate pathetic stuff that is BAD for the country. We will no doubt see a lot of this from you and Howard.
Interesting dynamic if the first opinion poll on Monday shows movement in either direction!
Rudd’s press conference shows how not ready for office he is by slamming Howard for going for a mother of all ‘negative’ scare campaign. But he then spent 20 minutes having a go at Howard. What a hypocrite!
Rudd has no record to speak of so one can and has to question his economic policy…but then again Kevin Rudd is a economic conservative and he is because he said he is on national tv, and here i was thinking that he would only screw the economy, but with a glowing endorsement from himself assuring us that he can manage it we must take his word. What a noob.
158 paul k That was me that screamed bias, and it was a tongue in cheek dig at the Liberals.
doofus
unfortunately the abc is just pale imitations of what real journalism should be
i have complained many times
but hey come the day after election i think more than one syncophant will jump ship with ratty’s demise
So billions of taxpayers money to a private health rebate scheme is good eh Glen…, We all give money to this government and it funds a private health with billions, of which only 30 percent of Australians can afford to be a part of. But its’ the States fault for this policy.. it would be better if this was abolished and the money put into public health.
And remember Glen over the last eleven years the share of money the commonwealth has provided to public health has gone down whilst the states share of revenue gone up…
Richard… The ABC may not be biased in this campaign but today it got off to a bad start… and if we measure coverage by minutes… fair dinkum havn’t our bean counters got more to do…
No doubt time for independent ABC board..
Marky ever heard of the GST?
And the States didnt reduce Taxes so they are rolling in cash yet they then blame the Commonwealth for everything…no level of Government can absolve themselves of these problems but for Rudd to blame Howard for education/health problems is a joke…
Labor Vote i will be going down on that same ship if it happens nevertheless how will the Rudd huggers be if he loses the election???
@ 152 Richard Jones posed the question:
@ 152 Richard Jones answered the question:
158 paul k There was no everybody. Just little ol me.
Ahh, there you go again Glen. You guys just don’t get it, it’s not working, you, Mad Monk, Dolly, Tip, Shrek et have all been trotting out the same tired old lines all year now but no one is listening. You can’t keep harping about the past, either you come up with something new for the future or accept you won’t be part of it.
Experience is an interesting argument.
For it pays to have experience but sometimes and I have seen this in the Corporate world some managers stay in the one role for a period of time and they keep the same types of people around them for what they may call a culture but in reality becomes morbid and narrow and this ultimately leads to a failure of policy.
This sums up the Howard Govt.
One thing is for sure after this election, if Rudd wins he will be unable to blame any party for a policy failure…
Where’s Costello??
Or will it be like 1998, 2001 & 2004 where he’s hidden away from the voters?
Where’s Gillard?
She will be hidden because she’s a liability…
Tim, I recall Costello in 98 and 01 was very active in the marginals, it will be interesting which seats he visits but more importantly how much time he spends in Higgins.
Cossie,
Is out trying to find some votes in Higgins. With Goldstein and Kooyong in play, guess who is “smirky” in the middle.
GG, Peter Costello is more active in Kooyong than the guy who is meant to be the MP.
Oops!
Glen governments should not give money to private operations.. such as in health and education. And Howard has been doing this massively over the last eleven years.. and our hospitals, universities and schools are in terrible state because of it…
The States haven’t been doing this…
Re vertical fiscal imbalance, NSW provides $45 billion in services each year, receives about $13 billion from the GST via the grants commission and less than $2 in $10 of expenditure in specific purpose grants, and this is declining. For example, in 2001 under the disability agreement the Feds provided about 20.2 per cent per year for services. Now, because of they provide less than 16 per cent. How does this equate to the states rolling in cash? Pure fiction.
#164 Snakeboy, my eight year old daughter asked, ‘Why is John Howard retiring?”
Chris B,
I am merely making the point that what ever the ABC does one side or the other accuses them of bias. No doubt for every complaint about bias they get from the Labor side they’ll get another one from the Liberal side. They’re in a no win situation.
To suggest as people on this site are that the ABC is being biased and trying to give Howard an advantage is just plain silly. How many people would have even watched either Rudd or Howard’s entire press conference? As if it would make any difference to the election at all if people didn’t see the entire press conference. The conspiracy theorists are alive and well on this site.
Glen 155 “Richard why arent you attributing any blame to the States why is it always the Howard Government who is to blame for State issues?”
Glen, are you actualy employed by the Liberal Party? Surely nobody with a 3 digit IQ would repeat your nonsense unless they were paid to do so.
We all know that the States are responsible for service delivery (hence North Sydney hospital is a NSW govt scandal) but the Commonwealth raises the tax revenue and sets the spending levels. Federal health policy, with public funds supporting private health insurers to “take the load” off the public system, has been a disaster, since there has been hardly any diversion of high cost patients away, despite billions spent. Education is no better, with Federal funds sunk inot wealthy private schools, while state schools simply keep sinking. Or what about the $10 billion plan to fix the Murray, that turned out not to have been even costed or approved by Treasury? Is that NSW’ fault too? Howard is not a great economic manager, he is just lucky. If you want great economic management study BHPB and Rio Tinto. They are the ones creating the wealth.
As for the “experience” nonsense, by that score William McMahon should have been our greatest PM, having been in Cabinet 21 years before he made the top job, at age 63. I think even fans would say he was not our best.
Well if the States werent all in debt they wouldnt have anything to worry about…
Glen you are wrong, I am sure the 30 years low payments to the States as a proportion of GDP, includes the GST. The idea of States rolling in money, in the context of the full vertical fiscal imbalance issue is a bit difficult to comprehend, even before I get to mention absurd and a bit uninformed.
Getting back to psephology if I may:
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/national2.shtml
My new threat assessment map.
BMW,
So you reckon Cossie is keeping out of Higgins because that is the best way to improve his vote there?
Poor Petro.
Yes Paul, but as I said it was a tongue in cheek dig at the so called Labor bias.
Rudd says: ” … Mr Howard’s vision for the future is to win the election, retire, and hand over to Peter Costello …”
Neat. Cutting. Lot’s of meat in there. I suspect it might cut through.
Glen: All evidence suggests that Kevin Rudd is biased.
# 38:
20 seats only, a majority of 6 or 4 whoever you look at the independents. He will retain bennelong but then resign losing it in the bi-election.
Tassie2, Victoria2, SA 3-4, WA2, NT1, NSW5, Q5.
The bookies would agree too.
thats an ALP win of course
Centaur, my thoughts:
Tas 2, Vic 1 (maybe 2), SA 3, WA 2, NT 1, NSW 3 (maybe 4), Qld 4
I could see up to 5 in NSW and 4 in SA, but can’t see a 5th in Qld. What would it be? Longman?
“Glen Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
Well if the States werent all in debt they wouldnt have anything to worry about…”
Glen, you are the “expert” so correct me if I’m wrong, but doesnt’t Queensland Treasury have over $20 billion in assetts in its investment fund? Not quite broke. Then again, having clarified the point about who actually funds the States in previous posts, if they were “all in debt” wouldn’t that just prove that whoever sets the overall funding had erred?
I finally understand! Glen is working for Labor! His job is to energise the party faithful to be active and outrage the neutrals until they switch to Rudd. I don’t even like Rudd and its working already Glen. Very clever.
It has been a very awkward start the campaign proper.
Howard did not start out sounding like he wants to wipe the floor with Rudd, whom he’d be apt to call a pretender and a pale shadow for all the agreement and imitation across the political divide. Surely, if you want the real thing, your voting option is self-evident.
Instead, we get “The Right Way†nonsense. The instinctive counter is surely that the slogan concedes an acknowledgment that they’ve been about the wrong way until now. That’s not the kind of ammunition you want to give wordsmiths. Anyhow, Howard does not sound like he believes it.
Howard sounded like he was not addressing Keating’s criticism in a censure motion from 1995, resurrected for all to see on YouTube. Howard must sound convincingly that he knows more than the electorate on whatever issue thrown up during the campaign. It doesn’t matter if he actually does know more, and it certainly doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. Say it with certainty of conviction and an implied care for the welfare of the nation, and it will not matter if it also sounds arrogant. Every time Howard was in a bind he used that technique: statesmanlike, rock solid in posture, clipped sentences in delivery, no detail beyond key message and an expression of grave knowledge on his face and in his voice.
It will work again if used with conviction. But for that Howard must want to decimate the Opposition. But for now, he sounds like he is spooked.
And then momentum can only be regained with a statesmanlike response to a serendipitous act of violence.
Where was Rudd for over two hours after Howard’s announcement? He couldn’t possibly have been barricaded in writing the waffle he came out with in his statement. It was all presidential, it was all “Iâ€. I don’t think there was a ‘together’ referring to the community and himself, or to the Labor party and himself, or to the shadow cabinet and himself in the entire pre-amble. Rudd’s spiel, full of motherhoods statements completely washed over. Nice place to live, Australia? Well, yes. I think we more or less settled on that one. ‘I had a fortunate life’. Good. Reference to Facey duly noted. And then what? A slogan? No. A battle-cry? No. Something punchy and quotable? No. Just an ‘intention to make the case over the course of the campaign’: may be a 5-10 year plan. (In one respect, Rudd’s right: it will probably take that long to swing the cultural pendulum)
Was the likelihood of the election being called news to him? Then why did it sound like it did?
Rudd’s apparently insurmountable challenge is caution born of imbuing every issue with a moral dimension and over-reacting in self-conscious piety, in trepidation before any imagined public judgment. That’s windmill stuff.
Sometimes such self-flagellation comes across better than other times. Last week, his intervention on the death penalty non-issue, the soufflé imploded. Rudd’s first campaign had caution washed all over it. He warmed up with the questions and remained the hammering points required, but fluffed the main point: that re-electing Howard will mean more of the same. It could be that in his lucid moments he confesses it may very well be more of the same, but then, what’s the point of the exercise?
It’s only worth changing the government, if you want to change the country. Poll spinners (pace Fairfax’ Walsh, talking to SkyNews, as replayed on Newsradio, just before the carried Rudd’s press-conference) reckon that those who claim in polls that they intend to vote Labor, do so not necessarily because they have been presented with any alternative, but because they “feel like giving Howard the birdâ€. And what is that if not a petulant bit of juvenilia?
And for as long as such a perception of the electorate persists of the electorate as herd, it’s voting intentions are all too easily manipulated. Bang.
Chris B,
To be honest I can’t remember what you said on the day. I just remember the subject came up. But I still think my point is correct and that is that the ABC are in an no win situation and no matter what they do they are going to be accused of bias.
Anyway I’ve go to go. Getting a little tired of this whole: Howard is the Saviour of Mankind or Howard is the Anti-Christ debate.
I have a suggestion… which the others on the site might find usefull
maybe people can identify the seats that they are certain will be retained
by the current party….. eg Blaxland (alp), Mallee(NP) Bradfield (lib)
that way we have a starting point to see what are the possible changes
depending on the size and distribution of swing at this election
WHO DO YOU TRUST TO KEEP INTEREST RATES LOW??
What happened to this claim?? Ahahahahaha
Well, here’s the ones I see as going to Labor, at the current state of play, for them to gain the 16:
Solomon (NT)
Bass (Tas)
Braddon (Tas)
Kingston (SA)
Makin (SA)
Wakefield (SA)
Hasluck (WA)
Stirling (WA)
Blair (Qld)
Bonner (Qld)
Herbert (Qld)
Moreton (Qld)
La Trobe (Vic)
Eden-Monaro (NSW)
Lindsay (NSW)
Parramatta (NSW)
and maybe
Deakin (Vic)
Dobell (NSW)
Off topic – but the 30 – 54 and 55+ two party preferred figures (51/49 and 59/41 respectively) quoted in The Sunday Age for the Taverner poll just don’t look right.
All other polls have the figures for these two demographics pretty much the other way around. Does anyone know if they have been inadvertently reversed? Otherwise this poll is very suss.
RE Adam @191…… thank you for the effort in making up this map
I pray it is true
Peter Costello is very popular in Higgins, regardless of the polls he should hold easily
States to blame – I thought it was funny when Abbott was told that the Commonwealth was now paying less as a proportion of the total health care budget than it use to that he blamed the States for paying more than they used to. Strangely he didn’t refer to them as State Labor governments like they usually do.
Great map adam. How did you determine the difference between seats at significan risk and seats at a possible risk?
*yawn* is it over yet?
inituition
Will, your friend who is moving will vote at his old address. Technically you have to re-enrol within 21 days of moving; but you also are meant only to enrol at an address that you’ve lived at for a month. (Hmm, well drafted that…)
Once the rolls close (Wed 8pm for new enrollees, 22nd for change of enrolments) your friend’s entitlement to vote will fix at his/her old address. Even if they do their ‘duty’ and lodge the form for the new address after that, it won’t be acted upon by the AEC.
On the caretaker convention, well it’s just a convention, but a journo from the AFR just asked my opinion and from first principles and the seat of my pants, I said it sensibly begins from the proroguing of the House in the election context. After all, it is only by being able to prove his support on the floor of the House that, by convention, the PM and ministgry can prove their ongoing right to a commission from the GG.
Adam – that’s a big claim on your website!!!
I want to see better graphics and fonts for me to believe you.
WA prediction; The ALP lose no seats but pick up Hasluck, Stirling and Canning.
Bewdy
Darn,
I think you are reading it wrong, it is 60-40 for the 30-54s and 51-49 for the 55+
Glen, you raise a good point. It’s time we gave Labor a chance to put an end to the bickering and work cooperatively with the states, since Howard’s long since proved unable to do it. Imagine the progress that will happen once it’s all done and dusted!
Why is Gillard a liability Glen? Because conservatives don’t like her. Because News Ltd journalists say so?
She makes mincemeat out of Tony Abbot everytime he opens his mouth. She has overwhelming support from women. She will make a damn fine deputy prime minister of Australia in 6 weeks time and just maybe Australia’s first woman PM one day.
So fire away at her. It only makes her more popular.
BMW,
Libs holding safe seats easily?????
Not in this election.
He might win, but he will sweat!
The map is not a prediction. It is an assessment of seats at risk.
What time is costello doing his campaign launch?
Thanks for that Timbo (212). I re-read The Age and it does seem to present the figures the way I gave them on page 5. Where did you get the figures in your post?
I agree about Costello. I don’t regard Higgins as being at risk.
#213 – I agree, nostradoofus. Gillard has been the most polished political performer of the last three months. She is a genuine asset to Labor.
Darn the figures you require can be found at
http://www.smh.com.au/news/federalelection2007news/the-young-and-the-restless/2007/10/13/1191696235752.html
What time is Costello doing his campaign-launch speech?
Bahahahhahaahahhahahahahahaha!!!!
Adam,
Is that more of that “sceintific intuition” you seem to have patented?
Me, I’ll stick with the crystall ball and my dreams.
This is the AEC federal election 2007 FAQ page
http://www.aec.gov.au/FAQs/federal_election2007.htm
A lot of routine questions are answered there, or will be soon.
re 209… I suggest the chap concerned contact the AEC ….. I’m not
sure but I suspect he would be able to change his enrollment to his
residence and vote for that address
When the SMH website first announced the election date, it showed a photo of Howard and Costello on one side of the frame and a photo of Rudd on the other. Within two hours, it has become just a frame showing Howard v Rudd. Interesting.
#211 – I don’t think Canning would fall personally, but it would be the next most likely to.
Any idea on how big the sample size was for the Taverner poll?
If it was small the the overall result may be useful but the demographic breakdowns would be misleading.
About a 1000 Albert
When parliament is prorogued can the coalition still call themselves the Government?
Would some of you stop bagging the ABC please? As Richard Jones pointed out, it’s ABC policy to give the major parties equal time. That will happen over the course of the campaign, within every individual ABC radio and TV program.
Unfortunately, as parthetic a policy as it may be, there is no other way to eliminate accusations of bias from either side, than to give them equal time. I noted that Howard himself brought his press conference to an end today, by saying “one last question”. That meant that, on the ABC at least, only a certain amount of Rudd’s reply would be shown.
These kind of time counts, line counts etc are also carried out by commercial media, to varying degrees. It’s the media’s way of insuring itself against accusations that it gave one party more air time/print space than another.
Ask Richard Alston what he thinks of the ABC’s pro-Liberal bias. Ask Neville Wran whether he thinks the ABC has a pro-Labor bias.
Albert F (226)
The Taverner sampled “about 1000 voters” according to the Sunday Age
Adam, all in all I think your assessment of the seats in play, and their relative risk of falling, is hard to fault. The only minor quibble I have is Menzies – if Goldstein, Casey and Kooyong are all at ‘possible’ risk, why wouldn’t Menzies be so as well? Perhaps no local member is more likely to suffer a Doctor’s Wives backlash than Kevin Andrews, and I would expect interest rates and, to a lesser extent, WorkChoices would be biting there as well. It’s also got a slightly smaller margin than Casey.
It’s certainly on my list of seats to keep an eye on.
Ruwake – yes, they’re still the government until the GG installs a replacement. They have all their usual powers, and could invoke them without legal challenge and certainly would in an ‘emergency’, though by convention they would do nothing controversial without formal opposition approval.
They are only hindered by two things. One, the Public Service is entering hibernation mode and so might respond more slowly or fractiously. Two, anything requiring the GG’s assent (eg new regulations, assenting to any leftover but passed bills, declaring war on Sudan) would I suspect be resisted, without bipartisan approval.
I like the way Adam has set his maps up very work!
I suspect after many months in here we have a rough idea which seats will fall and which seats may fall also which seats might go ‘up yours’ to the polls.
Thanks Graeme.
I missed Rudd’s speech but heard most of Howard’s. He said pretty much what I expected, but did struggle to say who was missing out on the economic benefits (apart from aborigines). I suspect people who think they’re hard do by financially at the moment might resent Howard’s sudden move to help aborigines out of their plight.
Howard seemed to hint that there’d be some policy on petrol prices and some tax relief to come. No surprise there, but I’d be surprised if he can offer anything substantial on petrol with spending billions.
It’s pretty obvious from the polls that young people are turning off Howard in droves. This is very significant, because most people tend to vote the same way most of their lives. There’s potential for a new Labor/Green voting generation. There was nothing in Howard’s speech that convinced me that he knows how to change the youth vote around. His response on WorkChoices is always to blather on about the need to repeal the unfair dismissal laws. That’s not the issue for young people – the issue is minimum wages and conditions, and protection against exploitation.
While I do understand the small business rationale for getting rid of the unfair dismissal laws, it’s hard to sell to the general public a policy which says we can create jobs by making it easier to sack people.
I’ve just done a big moderation cleanout, so apologies to those whose comments were held up.
William Bowe
http://www.pollbludger.com
I agree with Adam for leaving Menzies blank while colouring in Casey, Goldstein and Kooyong.
If the 2002 state poll had been on Federal boundaries the ALP would have picked up Casey, its a seat that has more in common with Aston and La Trobe with a great many families impacted by five interest rate rises, its a social Conservative area which may warm to Kevin Rudd’s style.
Casey Is to the Liberals what Lindsay is to the ALP, meaning it can be lost but only when one is on the nose.
Kooyong and Goldstein should never fall but Howard isn’t popular in these parts and the ALP have good candidates in these seats and Kevin Rudd’s promise to have budget surplus will go down nicely.
In the case of Kooyong the local MP is a dud.
So why wont Menzies fall, while I don’t go much on Kevin Andrews his seat suits the Howard Government’s type of Conservative more than the older Golden heartland seats.
“About a 1000 Albert” – thanks Possum.
I guess that make a MOE of around 5% for each demographic. Enough to conclude the young-uns don’t like howard (golly I’m shocked). And the blighters are media savvy as well – so the old-school media blitz on workchoices is counter-productive.
I wonder what Howard will do to reach the young folk – maybe attend press conferences with an acoustic guitar and answer tricky question with bob dylan ballads.
I just saw on speech transcripts the comments about Labor’s front bench beign 70% union officials. Not too many doctors, nurses, teachers, engineers or tradespeople. Hardly a representative sample of Australians if true. It reflects the reality of the left-wing political establishment
But it occurred to me that a similar question might be asked of the right wing political establishment. What percentage of the current members of Cabinet are lawyers? Quite a few I suspect. How many of the rest are farmers, (the industry that produces just 3% of our GDP)? So is a group of lawyers and farmers any more representative than union officials? No.
Albert,
Wot, “The Times they are A’Changin”.
Have you guys seen this new political party senator online?
http://www.senatoronline.com.au/
Basically if one of their candidates gets elected anyone in the country can log in and vote on how their senators should vote in parliament.
Unusual, no? I hope they are extremely strict in forcing people to only vote once.
We had a discussion about Menzies here yesterday. The seat is further out than Kooyong or Goldstein, and it’s mainly new money suburbs rather than old money suburbs. The DW vote is heavily in the old money suburbs. Menzies is full of second-generation Greek and Italian businesspeople who have done well, built big houses in Templestowe, and sent their kids to private schools. Some are Labor out of family tradition but increasingly they are Liberal. They don’t like unions and do like WorkChoices. I don’t think climate change, Iraq or Dr Haneef will shift many votes here. I think Menzies is much less at risk than Kooyong or Goldstein (and I don’t expect Labor to win either of them). The above also applies to Aston.
Once somebody finds a scan of the proclamation please post it. I like collecting such documents.
The one from last election for those interested: http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/4109/0055cc0.jpg
When do nominations close?
#263: 1 November
#257 et al…
The subtlety being missed here is that that of the 18-29 age group, is that over 40% of this group were too young to vote on 2004. So the shift is not only in those being re-polled, but there is perhaps also a generational change under way in this vote.
Its not so much that they are changing their allegiances, but that the next wave of young-uns have a different agenda that J-HO is unable to tap.
Thanks James, When do we get to know senate preferences?
Adam,
i think you’ve mixed up Mallee and McEwan.
@257 Albert
Bob Dylan ballads?
There is a good Lady Sovereign track Johnny “love me or loathe me” Howard might want to use.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3ILUic7aN0
Snakeboy, there was a phone conversation:
Brian Loughnane: Get him out of it!
SMH: Who, Howard?
BL: Don’t be smart.
SMH: But they’re a team.
BL: I’m not going to f**king argue. Just remember who butter’s your f**king bread paper boy, and get him out of it!
SMH: Okay. Sorry. (Hangs up then mumbles to himself ‘Jeez, what a crank.’)
Listening to the shrilling Helen Coonan. We are all going to need ear plugs by the end of 6 weeks.
Again, we see the “L” plate ads again – sums up the Libs for the past 12 months – nothing new ideas just a regurgitating of the old.
“Economy will be crashed into a wall” – this is the smear campaign that Rudd was talking about. 70% former union officials and so on and so on.
Helen Coonan, I’ll give you an insight, you bought in Workchoices without a mandate, why SHOULD we trust you again?
The Liberals are totally devoid of a future plan.
Thanks Adam for putting Leichardt at risk. For the last month or so there has been plenty of Labor advertising here in Cairns but I haven’t seem a single Lib ad except for the official Government propaganda. Brand recognition in this electorate is all important and the retirement of Warren Entsch opens up the field tremendously. Tourism workers have suffered greatly under AWA’s (people work odd hours here), I don’t like the chances for the Liberal candidate.
Barney. Sh*t so I did, thanks.
#266: well the group voting tickets have to be lodged within 48 hours after the close of nominations. So a bit after that i imagine.
Warren Entsch has been a pretty good local member over the years. He has a lot of respect among key aboriginal constituencies. This is far from being a gimme for the coalition.
GG,
perhaps –
A hard rain is gonna fall
Everything is Broken
Farewell
Going, Going, Gone
Honey, Just Allow Me One More Chance
endless material to make his last tour a good one
Unfortunately Trevor scare tactics work… I think myself agree it is pathetic, but many Australians are dills and fall for such stuff… Look at the last few federal election campaigns… Interest rates scare, terrorist scare… scare followed by scare .. and why because it takes people away from the real issues.. Hides the everyday problems with negative rubbish.
On the topic of mandates, Howard told Parliament in April 1998:
Quoted by By Alan Ramsey, Sydney Morning Herald, 18 August 2004
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/17/1092508474312.html
Hmmmm, it would have been nice to have been told before the 2004 election about WorkChoices.
Adam,
your maps make up a pleasing mosaic ( if that gets past the J*W filter).
On a minor point, I think you habe Mallee and McEwen around the wrong way in your map. If only Mallee were in serious trouble!
#275 – “Hurricane”? Should get the climate change vote.
I think its highly hypocritical for the ALP to say the Liberals are going to mount a scare campaign when the ALP have conducted one on Workchoices and Nuclear power….more negative rubbish from Labor…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mpyFanUWKA
Wilson Tuckey at his best.
I have plan to scheme, lie and cheat my way back in to office.
Glen, do you have any ideas I that can use in my plan?
# 276 – You’re right Marky…but this time around, there’s not much left to scare people with. In fact, the things most people are reaLLlly scared of, like Workchoices (sic), have been visited on the hapless electorate by The Rodent himself.
He is the quintessential boiling frog.
Maybe I’m not one of Howard’s capitalist employers elite, but, I don’t see what the “70% are ex-unionists” campaign is meant to be about… So, does this mean we’re meant to fear a party whose candidates might fight for a raise in workers pay packets and improve workplace safety? Is that really all the Liberals have left in their gun-locker?
Today’s ALP is just as hopelessly corrupted by economic rationalism as the Liberals are these days. The governments of Hawke and Keating were further to the Right on the economy than Fraser’s, and pretty much on par with Howard’s.
At best, the Liberals are being laughed at for fearing reds under the beds: they might convince some of the rusted on lunar Right but few else. At worst, it may remind people of WorkChoices and suggest there’s an outside off chance the ALP might actually replace it with something less horrible for working people.
# 280 – Glen, scare campaigns are about “what will happen if…?”. The attack on Workchoices (sic) has been about “Sh*t!!! Look what has happened!” That’s not a scare campaign, it’s a reality check.
Hello Snake
Your $2.75 is looking good and I reckon your $4.75 on Maxine is still in with a very good chance, as the date gets closer and more people realise the Howard government is gone this will greatly increase Maxines chances.
I have fixed Mallee-McEwen. If I had to put money on a seat the Coalition will not lose it would be Mallee.
I agree that Entsch is a very big loss for the Libs, and that Leichhardt is at serious risk despite its large majority. Cairns is no longer a blue-collar town, but it is full of low-paid service and tourism workers, and WorkChoices will be toxic for the Libs there as it is in all the regional cities.
JWH copy Rudd he’s doing such a ‘bang up job’…
# 285 – Hey Arbie! What a good memory you have! Although…my $3K went on Rudd at $2.55 not $2.75. Still…enough to roll around in for a few days before donating the lot to MSF.
#280: Hypocrisy. It is an interesting concept. One man’s hypocrisy is another man’s ‘crisis management’. It is amazing how far up the pulpit we can go when personally we have nothing to lose. Given the highly artificial nature of the latest fashion in media moshpit, we should be a little more forgiving of our political leaders from both sides. I think the value of the blogoshpere is in deciphering the MSM-mangement tactics of our leaders and presenting the ‘real’ message behind the artifice for those who care.
Socrates Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
Sorry to persist, but again, can anyone post a link to where JH’s press conference can be seen on the net?
It’s on the ABC, Ninemsn, News Ltd Websites.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/14/2059084.htm
Rudd’s here.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/
An interesting article on the Australian election. Kevin Rudd the Peter Perfect of Australian politics?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7016666.stm
Snake, MSF?
Why would workchoices be toxic in Cairns Adam has not workchoices assisted more people in getting a job?
Longman will fall before Leichhardt if that happens at all.
I think as the campaign goes on people will unfortunately come back to Howard, unless he makes a massive glitch… Rudd though will win but not with as bigger margin as the polls suggest.
Hawke as popular as he was did not get the same results as Rudd is experiencing in the Polls in 1983…
and then their was a diabolical economy with high unemployment and inflation…
I would actually put Higgins more at risk than either Goldstein or Kooyong. Not that I think the ALP will win any of them as the Liberal base is too strong.
My basis for this is that the western end of Higgins – Prahran etc will build up bigger and bigger ALP 2pp votes – based on Green rather than ALP primary votes. This, however is balanced by the gentrification and greater tendency to vote Liberal in Ashburton, Carnegie etc.
The problem for the ALP winning any of these seats is that there is no substantial ALP base, and the areas that tended more toward the ALP are gentrifying (North Kew etc.) making them more and more upper middle class.
Menzies is very similar to Aston, though there could still be a very big swing in Aston. There is a big Asian community in Menzies that may turn agisnt Kevin Andrews. I could see 4 – 5% swings in Menzies, Kooyong, Goldstein, Higgins but 7 -8% in Aston would not surprise.
For what it is worth, my aging mother (more than rusted onto the Liberal Party, she is welded and bolted!!) told me her ideal outcome last night. The Libs win but John Howard loses Bennelong!
Their is an argument that says that people who get their first job have never seen what the conditions where originally like and that argument is a good one..
Because you get those dills who also say that the unions have never done anything for the country…
Nonetheless workchoices will be a big issue…
Especially with families who have children attending university and working in hospitaliy and are getting paid less than the were before or are working at hours which affect their studing options…
# 292 – Medecins Sans Frontieres, Arbie. Get on ‘em. It’s a growing industry.
# 294 – Marky, what issue has enough traction in the electorate for The Ropdent to use to scare people back to him? Seriously…what’s there?
L- Plate Rudd? Hasn’t worked so far.
thank God the time has come im sick of living in nation that the tories have made change the government change the country lets set things right get rid of this mob
“Why would workchoices be toxic in Cairns” – it is more likely that interest rates will have a greater effect (around Cairns at least) than Workchoices (although that won’t help). There has been a significant decrease in affordability in recent years around Cairns (anecdotal – but would challenge naysayers to prove me wrong from ABS).
On Leichhardt, I have spent a lot of time in FNQ for work, holiday, and family reasons. Yep, there are a lot of casuals working in tourism, but a massive proportion are European backpackers, who don’t vote anyway.
Warren Entsch has built up a huge personal vote, but as Adam says, Cairns is not the working classtown it used to be – very middle class and suburban actually.
IMHO, well to the edge of the loss spectrum.
WorkChoices has nothing to do with getting jobs. That is determined by sustained economic growth.
WorkChoices has reduced the cost of jobs, which means people are being paid less.
i saw an article some weeks ago that suggested that the Democrats in America concentrate too much on logic, and not enough on emotion. That’s why they lost the last 2 presidential elections, and by concentrating on anti war feeling they won the mid terms.
There’s an emotional reaction to WChoice.. ride that feeling.. call it SerfChoices every chance you get.
People are worried about Climate Change.. show pictures of dried up creek beds, raging floods, a Nuclear power stations.. don’t mention statistics.
If they’re worried about leadership, show K07 with crowds of young folk, then a quick shot of JWH on his morning walk..etc, etc
Purists like me will grumble, but it’s not “ILLogical”…its the best way to win an election, & get a logical Govt.
On an emotional level, my sense is that people ARE getting out the Baseball bats for JWH.
Yes lets have the Unions run Australia and lets have one party be in at all levels of Government and lets have a bloke who has less than 1 year of leadership experience and been in Parliament for less than 10 years as PM and lets have Julia Gillard as Deputy Prime Minister and lets have Wayne Swan as Treasurer wow what a bang up job they’ll do if Labor wins….
I’m after a little advise from my comrads:
I vote in SA, out of the serious contenders in the senate should i put FF last or the Libs. last? I don’t want to see FF become a force but I also don’t want the Libs. to retain senate control. FF apears marginally better on some issues and a whole lot worse on others. Still do I really want them with control in the senate if they’ll be simply campaigning for an Iranian style theocracy? I’m leaning towards putting the Libs. marginally higher, any advise?
I hope you are right Snakey… but people are fickle and tend to i think in polls lash out governments to get something in return at that moment to blame someone or something for their situation…
And the scare tactics will in a way work… and when it comes to voting some people will not have it their heart to change and of course you have the rusted on lib voters who will come back.. .
Labor as i said will win but not by such a large margin.. Although on saying that some of the State Labor efforts in recent years have seen quite significant victories so perhaps i could be wrong..
Another thing although i don’t think is Government have been economic managers… and i do not believe the unemployment rates.. These two things may sway a few votes…
Wow, it seems you’ve decided to vote for Labor, good work Glen!
I think it’s actually the opposite. Despite being flogged in the polls on a comparative basis, Howard’s approval ratings are decent for a leader who’s been in for eleven years. While a lot of us here find him distasteful, I don’t think he is regarded too badly in the wider world. However, the electorate wants change and while John is familiar and somewhat adequate, it’s out with the old and in with the new. And I think that’s the scary thing for the Coalition – it ISN’T emotional. Emotions are easy to play with and manipulate, but this is a cold and hard feeling of “it’s time”.
(disclaimer: I could be talking out of my arse)
Glen, what experience did Costello have as Treasurer before becoming it in 1996? We know what experience Howard had (lets not go there).
there is a big difference between being conservative and being radically
right wing….. John Howard is in the second category as is the govt he leads… I would class Malcolm Fraser as in the first category . Australia had what I would call the post war consensus which has been largely dismantled… the GST and ” work choices” are perfect examples of this
There are now no small l liberals such as Mr Chaney or Ian Mcphee who have any influence now with the Howard Government. Witness NSW
where the exteme right controls the party machine
Shows on you are right workchoices reduces demand.. through cuts to wages and is bad for the economy ….it is 1931 economics all over again.
Cuts supply costs and it will help create more jobs but to the overall economy it only helps one sector and that is big business as they have the funds to advertise and get more business..
#304: Interesting predicament, Molatov. I think there’s more chance of the Libs getting a third seat than FF getting one at all, so I’d put the Libs lower down.
A couple of comments/questions re the Taverner poll: first, Possum, I’m not sure I follow what you meant at comment #100 – can you clarify?
Second, darn at #219 is right – it looks like the Sunday Age mixed things up – Sun-Heraldlink provided by Eddie-C at #238 (and my hard copy of the paper) shows Labor getting 49% of over-55s.
Third, Taverner shows a 59-41 2pp result from a respectable sample of 979 across NSW & Victoria only. You can only conclude ‘business as usual’ – the result is 0.2% higher for Labor than the average of every Nielsen and Newspoll poll taken between April and September. Extrapolate the state relativities from six months of Nielsen & Newspoll and the Taverner poll equates to a fraction less than 57% for Labor on a national basis.
Glen are you a Lawyer we could really use you in the Liberal party because we only have 70% Lawyers?
We could really use your help in drafting Workchoices Mkii.
Put another way, the only subtext that Rudd needs to get across is that an ALP victory means that Ruddock, the Monk, Dolly, the Rodent etc etc won’t be on the evening news anymore. “New Leadership” does it quite neatly.
Agreed Trev but compared to Ralph Willis anybody including someone with little experience could have done a better job…how on earth could anybody think Swan would be a better Treasurer than Costello.
“Why would workchoices be toxic in Cairns Adam has not workchoices assisted more people in getting a job?”
Glen there is no evidence that WorkChoices has created any jobs, the increase in jobs has been very similar for the past 14 years.
Everyone who has looked at wages has found that hospitality workers have lost wages and conditions, this will bite in Cairns, it will also bite in Longman, Wide Bay, Fairfax and Fisher.
Enough to lose Longman and give the others a fright.
Blackburn @ 295
That is interesting about your ageing mum’s ideal outcome. Did she say why?
Scorpio, thanks I have seen the videos now.
Glen, still no comment on the “representativeness” of a Liberal Cabinet full of lawyers? Then again, who better to run an economy than party full of a profession that charges high fees yet produces no saleable product?
Thinking about the whole 70% union-official smear, isn’t it undermined by Rudd’s essentially non-union background? It might get traction if Howard could convince people that Rudd is a union puppet, but as long as Rudd comes across as being in control that seems unlikely. I would have said that Rudd is more in danger of being seen as a control-freak than as anyone’s puppet.
Glen,
I just hope that after the election is over that you have as much energy dedicated towards reforming the Libs as you do in spreading Lib dogma on this site. When the election is over the Libs will have to admit Work Choices was a disaster and dump all the Neo Cons who have swung the Party to the hard right. Are you up to the challenge?
Snake
Re Medicienes Sans Frontiers, they were the only ones who asked that people stop donating after the tsunami as they had donations to fulfil their obligations there, whilst the others kept asking and a lot remained unspent, and some still does?
I liked their no nonsense approach.
Medicienes Sans Frontiers. An excellent organisation and well worth supporting.
Howard was just on ten news. And the negative ads from the Libs have already started: “learner plates” on the economy, and anti-business. They don’t even have fresh ideas for their propaganda; it’s just a rehash of their attack ads on Latham.
Costello has been a dud as treasurer, under his watch Foreign Debt has gone from 150 Billion in 1996 to 540 billion and rising… Yep great treasurer indeed..
Whilst we sell the farm to the chinese and than get back our resources with chinese made goods.. Great treasurer this Costello, Glen
Sean Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
#304: Interesting predicament, Molatov. I think there’s more chance of the Libs getting a third seat than FF getting one at all, so I’d put the Libs lower down.
But doesn’t that only make a difference if the Libs., FF and another candidate are left in the running? Yet I’ll be putting Gre., Dems., Lab. and Mr X higher. Probably only the CEC and ON will be lower on my vote. So my predicament will only come up if its only the Libs and FF fighting for the last spot. Which would i rather have “represent” me?
Thank God this match has finally kicked off – I feel like we’ve been forced to sit through hours of dire pre-game entertainment before a highly anticipated match.
I think JWH boxed himself into a corner re the date, like he was waiting and hoping for the numbers to turn. But as many here have pointed out previously, waiting for too long brings it own risks. Consequently, Howard really had no choice but to call the election today – going back to Parliament this week would’ve been a bad look.
So it’s doubly satisfying that he was obliged to call it on a day with a poll suggesting WORSENING numbers (so much for the “narrowing”), and rumour has it that tomorrow’s Galaxy will be more of the same (and Newspoll on Tuesday also).
My brother has a theory of political inertia – that things (such as polls) will basically continue in the same vein until something acts upon them. This is where Howard and the Libs are now – hoping and waiting for a miracle to save them.
But Glen, I’ve just in one swoop destroyed this argument of lack of experience. And thats all the ALP has to do and another thing the ALP won’t have control of the senate therefore they won’t have total control like the Coalition has had the last 3 years.
This election has been determined by one issue a long time ago – Workchoices and their abuse of trust by implementing it. Trust – once it is gone you are a goner in the short term.
Paul K the answer is no….
Why should i try and move my party to the left when the Labor Party have in you scenario moved their Party to the right to win?
And i dont consider my views a part of a dogma any more than your views are a dogma of Labors…
Workchoices is not a disaster…one change would have rendered the Unions attack useless but we didnt make that change until 1 year before an election…and i dont consider it a disaster when Rudd has virtually copied workchoices…
And another thing Costello economics also involves selling of public owned assets such as commonwealth buildings and then renting them back from the new owners via leases that are two to three times times the cost of borrowing to finance the buildings..
Costello economics….Great treasurer… this man…
Alas Glen. Then you must prepare for a very long time in opposition. If you lose the election and you can’t even admit that Work Choices was a disaster then the Libs are finished.
He used to sit opposite John Dawkins in parliament, that’s about it.
This election will determine that. The first rule of politics is to get elected, if WorkChoices contributes to Howard’s downfall, then it will be considered nothing but a disaster.
#324 Mol: In all likelihood, the SA senate will be: 3 ALP, 2 LP, 1 Mr X. I don’t think it could come down to a battle between a 3rd LP and a FF.
A big part of Work Choices is not just the reduced wages and loss of conditions, it is the loss of dignity that it inflicts on people.
Work Choices gives all power to the mployer and no rights to the employee, it brings fear back into the workplace.
I worked in industries where there were no rights, I signed an employment contract that agreed to certain conditions, but 3 weeks into this, the major one, time off was laughed aside with “I didn’t get days off when I started in this industry, why should you get them”.
Aside from the fact it was an agreement that I got time off for one and the way it was sprung on me. The company knew I had just taken out a home loan and thought they had me by the b*lls. I was fortunate that there were other opportunities and got other work.
But for a lot of others they do not have the same opportunities and a lot of the changes to work conditions happen after they commence work.
Glen: Right on.
This election is going to put Labor right back where it should be – in the wilderness.
Bring on Nov 24!
Very true. I have no idea how it helps improve workplace efficiency and productivity when workers get paid less, and have worse conditions. That would make them less loyal and motivated to their work.
Arbie Jay
I also agree on MSF. I saw the same message when I tried to donate money after the tsunami. After reading that they were firstly honest enough to say they had enough money, and secondly that they desperately needed funds for refugees in Darfur, I donated to the latter cause. Where incidentally, refugees are now being restricted from Australia due to their being too black, sorry I mean unable to integrate.
I haven’t mentioned this before (and for the life of me I cant explain why)- but it certainly has major relevance to the anti-union campaign the Coalition is running.
Back in June when the ALP TPP was 58% (i.e the same as it is now within MoE), in OzTrack33 there’s an issue in the regression modeling called “The Role of Unions”.That issue is actually well on the ALP side of the positioning chart (meaning they own it in a beneficial way), it was a high confidence issue and its influence as a vote driver was actually slightly higher than “Industrial Relations”, “Education” and “Do What’s Right” on the ALP side, and drove the vote more than than “Low interest rates” the “Economy”, “Defence and Security” and “Strong Team” did for the Coalition.
In fact, the only two Coalition issues which had a higher coefficient than “The role of unions” were “Lower taxes” by a very very very small amount(better described as being equal) and “National Interests”.
This anti-union spiel wont play.The fact that it has to be used is more about firewalling the small business vote than it is about winning the election.
I wished I’d pocked this up earlier.
Canberra Boy (312) Thanks for clearing that up
Howard ran the “70% of Labor candidates are former union officials” line about 3 times during his press conference. I honestly thought he would’ve concentrated more on what he is going to DO. Rather than run a negative attack first up. In fact, if he wanted to win today, he could’ve announced a brand new policy that Rudd would’ve had to immediatley respond to in his first election speech.
Reading Glen’s dedicated defence of the indefensible, one thing I have to admire about the Liberals under Howard is that they really stick to their lie. I guess that is what they call the “virtue” of perseverance. Perhaps that would be a good slogan this time around:
“keep the lie alive, vote Liberal”
Of course, perseverance is only a good thing when you are sticking to a winning strategy. Otherwise it becomes inability to adapt. Sort of a dinosaur thing… This election might be aptly titled “A Lie Too Far”.
#286 – no arguments that Labor has absolutely no chance of winning Mallee, but I think it’s a seat which has considerable potential to go independent if one with sufficient profile emerges – there are a lot of angry waterless irrigators in that part of the world. It was reported a couple of weeks back that local irrigators’ spokesman Danny Lee was going to run, but I haven’t heard anything since.
Menzies,
I thought you’d died and gone to heaven. Or are you in the other place?
In case you hadn’t noticed the current version of the Liberal Party is nothing like the one you founded and the Cold War is over. How the whiskey in heaven?
CB at 312
I used the Taverner poll to exptrapolate the demographic swings over NSW and Victoria using the 2006 census data and that was the result.Its actually just Sydney and Melbourne that were surveyed, but to find out those city specific results, you’ll have to read about it at Crikey on Tuesday where I’ll have Taverner, Galaxy and Newspoll broken down together
Ruawake at 316 – don’t forget McPherson with the hospitality jobs!
Wow, he just did the “70% union officials” line again live on Ten News!
This is going to get terribly boring for 6 weeks with both Howard and Glen saying this constantly.
Socrates #258 [What percentage of the current members of Cabinet are lawyers? Quite a few I suspect]
Over 60% of the cabinet are lawyers
The Aboriginal speaker got it right the other day when he described the PM as “the same old snake with a new skin”.
The PM has the nature of a snake, sneaky and devious.
People can see through this tatic of trying to remake the PM, it will be a political disaster, because he is still the same Howard on the inside, there is no sign of genuine remorse or repentance from him.
hahahahhah Howard on Ten News has now renaimed WorkChoices to “pro small business rules”.
Still waiting for the Liberal Party to actually surprise me. So far, I’ve heard nothing different from what I’ve been hearing all year. Yet I’m meant to change my mind now because… ?
Nothing wrong with Lawyers on either side Dario, doesn’t matter if you are doing well or badly you can never have enough lawyers!!!!!!!
*smiles innocently* and that is my completely unbiased view AS A LAWYER.
Watch out for these terrible unionists.. all part of a crowd who gave you all holidays, sick leave, safer working conditions and a minimum wage but watch out you may catch a disease….
Just saw my first cawflute
Memo to Possum
You said that the Galaxy tomorrow is not good for the Libs in your blog.
Have you heard something? Any numbers?
Anyone else heard something?
Adam, thanks for your threat map.
So Dunkely and Hughes are possible Labor gains? Interesting.
Problem with the anti-union stuff is that the Libs all grew up in a fairly narrow gene-pool, and seem to think the word “union” is self-evidently bad to the aveage punter.
When it isnt. As such, very little content work has been put in to the bogey. Its quite ineffective.
Moreover, huge numbers of non-members rely on union negotiated awards – are are, at worst, indifferent to unions, and often vaguely positive. Id wager more than half the population are either members, or rely on unions indirectly for their bargaining.
Thus, the association of many is “improved wages and conditions”.
Scary stuff!!
Yep Shows on and a GST for small business was?
Why doesn’t Rudd use the “70% lawyers” line on the Coalition?
Are lawyers more popular and respected than unionists?
Adam at 208
Thanks. I think I’ll laminate it and get out a permanent marker to tick them off as Antony calls them on the 24th. Lovely.
Howard abused his control of the Senate by inflicting a vicious IR policy upon Australian workers. That will be his legacy and, with luck and a fair wind, his epitaph.
Possum
I think the same could be said for any electorate that has tourism as one of the major industries.
WOW I just saw my first Liberal party attack advert. The Liberals don’t seem to have much money, so surely they are putting out these attack ads to make an impression early on.
If these adverts don’t work for them, they are scrooged.
If we don’t hear about Galaxy on the news tonight I think we can assume it shows no significant movement from the last poll. They’d crow from the rooftops should it show a significant movement back to the ALP.
Shows On: What was it about/like?
Correction to 361
They’d crow from the rooftops should it show a significant movement back to the Coalition.
Good luck to all party staffers on here! I’m glad my job’s not riding on this election.
Jasmine, I don’t neccesarily have a problem with lawyers, but if you asked the person on the street where they ranked them I think you wouldn;t like the answer
Adam,
Thanks for the map. Certainly shows the difficulty for the Libs. How do you defend so many seats?
Well, I think the key development to day was this: Howard hasnt got a simple clear campaign pitch this time.
If he did, he would have used it today. ‘Something about experience, steady hand, silly economic car metaphor, yada yada’ just wont cut through.
As such, barring some unforeseen event of massive proprotions, it looks like more “im all over the place starting fights and putting out fires” from Howard for the duration. Much like all of 07.
And that makes Nov 24 electoral checkout time for Team Rodent.
It said the economy is the most important thing (debatable, I think the economy is a means to an end, not an end in itself)
it said Rudd and Swann are L platers with no experience dealing with the economy.
It had a photo of Gillard who it accused of being an anti-business unionist.
it had a photo of Howard and Costello with a label “Pro Growth”
Weak as piss really.
Just in case anyone is interested?
.
.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Hillary Clinton has a 21-point lead over fellow Democrat Barack Obama in New Hampshire, one of the first states to vote in the nominating process for the 2008 U.S. presidential election, a poll showed on Sunday.
Individual Lawyers like individual journalists, politicians, judges or anyone else with power can be: Good, OK or Bad but never nuetral.
Mrs ruawake (non political) said “why can’t they just tell us what their policies are instead of this childish stuff”?
This is going to be fascinating. Clearly, Rudd and Labor have comprehensively won the faux campaign. All should be set for them now: “the issues” are Labor issues; the imagery of “the future”, “new leadership” and being “in touch” is a Labor-friendly composite.
On the other hand, the coalition’s messages and strategies have backfired, compounding their disadvantages and nullifiying their strengths.
It will be interesting to see if the campaign proper moves votes or not. I have a feeling that not much movement is likely. What can the government try that they have not already tried? What will work for them? Leadership? No – it’s a taboo issue, really for the Liberals. Their record? No – this is the past when the focus is on the future. Security? No – already worn out and discredited. The labor market? No, it’s a complete fiasco now….Stealing public hospitals? Not likely…
This is going to be a fascinating campaign.
RE Howard playing the race card IE all equal before the law.
OR BASHING BLACKS
Evans Gareth Gareth said “Howards never happy except when he is bashing blacks”
At that Howard and his backers on this site smirked to themselves “Not bashing blacks But BASHING BOUNGS” ____SORRY TO HAVE TO USE THAT TERM BUT THATS HOW THEY THINK____
Howard on the weekends when he worked as a kid at his fathers service station used to see the black kids from the the outskirts of Sydney as it was then. Happy go Lucky laughing and jumping about as they headed down to fish and swim at the long hole, as the creek was then known, and he hated them. Because they seemed alive… Because they enjoyed each others company Because they seemed human.
Janet taught him to turn these feelings into a reason to govern and to poison the well.
Finally! It’s on like Donkey Kong…as the youth of today say.
The work Christmas Party is on the night of the 24th….will make things interesting. Does mean that if Howard pulls a miracle turnaround there will be unlimited booze to drown my sorrows in
Does anyone know if tomorrow’s Galaxy shows a bad picture for the Coalition overall (TPP/Primary) as well as a bad result ‘in the marginals’?
This is quite astonishing. Most polls had her behind 1 month ago.
Possum’s spys have suggested that Galaxy isn’t good for the government. Whether that means same old, same old, or a swing to Labor we will find out late tonight.
Gary Bruce,
Your earlier comment is entirely correct. A vote for Labor will have the same effect as a vote for Liberal.
Unless of course the Labor party has adopted the Trotskyite “entryism’ tactic – once you get into the citadel you then show your true spots.
If that’s what they really believe and they do get in stand by for a replay of the Whitlam government.
Trotskyite “entryism’ tactic – once you get into the citadel you then show your true spots.
eg Workchoices?
How much is being the top of the list worth (ie straight donkey vote)? Does it differ considerably according to the seats demographics?
Here’s a full listing of the primary former occupations of the cabinet for those who are interested:
Howard – Lawyer
Vaile – Real Estate Agent
Costello – Lawyer
Downer – Economist, Diplomat
Nelson – Doctor, Union Leader
Minchin – Lawyer
Abbott – Journalist
Ruddock – Lawyer
Turnbull – Lawyer
Coonan – Lawyer
Truss – Farmer
Andrews – Lawyer
Bishop – Lawyer
Brough – Army Officer, Businessman
Macfarlane – Farmer
Hockey – Lawyer
McGauran – Lawyer
Ellison – Lawyer
Derek @ 317
re: my aging Mum’s best case election scenario:
1. He has been there long enough – she referred to John Howard as a “silly old coot” – she is 78.
2. She likes Peter Costello – “everybody likes Peter Costello” (she moves in very limited circles!)
3. She likes Maxine McKew – “Shes smart, she will do a good job – she was the best person on the ABC, a much better interviewer than that silly Kerry O’Brien”
4. She doesn’t like Kevin Rudd – “He is mealy mouthed, I just don’t like him”
5. On jwh and aborginal reconciliation – her eyes rolled back in her head “hasn’t he had a long time to do something about it and why now?”
It was quite an interesting (and to me, surprising) viewpoint.
The Liberals look have already started with tier typical conservative negative fear advertising campaign. Which I think will be counterproductive on the whole given that Labor will be putting the emphasis on freshness, change, youthful vitality.
Which appeals more: dirt and fear – or freshness and change?
There are 50 million Chinese moving from the countryside each year. This is providing a huge and very cheap labour pool. Combine this with places like Shanghai’s unfettered capitalism and you have a cheap and, if you live there, nasty environment. Work Choices lets businesses begin to compete with this. If we do seek to compete on a like basis then we are merely engaging in a “race to the bottom”.
Edward,
Governments are more than just a collection of policies. Two governments can have similar policies and still be completely different. You’ll learn this in time.
Dont worry ESJ, “mimicry as eternal ideological victory” is the phase after denial, so you’re good making progress!
I remember thinking the same in 96, with Howard loving up medicare and keeping his head down.
Then of course …. everything changed.
AM
It’s a great line about snakes, but I fear it’s unfair on snakes. In my experience with snakes, I have found them to be fair and reasonable. They defend their territory and their young by trying to kill you, which is fair enough. No, I have to disagree. John Howard is not a snake. Snakes are honourable creatures.
Ah Lefty E
I dont think anyone who has followed JWH would disagree that he has always supported Labor market deregulation etc.
Having said that – the ACTU did succesfully demonise it and the Liberals did not anticipate and react to a scare campaign against it – hence there will be a price to be paid.
The main failing of the government was not to make the appearance of fairness front and centre. The ACTU did manage to some extent to make union privilege equate with fairness and the government did nowhere enough to deny them that argument.
If Labor thinks they can get in and make everyday “medicare gold” day they are sadly mistaken – they will get a backlash to rival Whitlam in 1975.
379 Dario
Wrong – Hockey and Minchin should be down as party hacks. Turnbull had done a number of things and McGauran should be down as landed gentry.
Dario,
thanks for the facts, which were as I suspected. A narrow lot.
jasmine_Anadyr I also don’t hate lawyers, my best friend is one. But the point is they are not repreesntative of the majority of adult Australians – they are one profession. What would we say if cabinet was 60% doctors (well at least hospitals would work) or engineers (hmmm, our infrastructure would be a lot better)? I won’t even try to imagine a Liberal cabinet of 60% teachers. Whereas at least union officials are supposed to be representative of a larger group.
Um, what union privilege? If workers want to be represented by a union in their workplace then they can be. If workers don’t want to be represented in a workplace, then they don’t have to be. That is a fundamental democratic right.
I’ve heard constant union bashing by the government over the last 10 years, but they have never explained why a worker can’t choose to let a union represent them in the workplace.
By bashing unions so hard, the government is telling voters that they don’t think they deserve penalty rates, sick pay, personal leave etc. Explaining why workers don’t deserve those things is a rather difficult task.
ESJ I think the mistake that every political party makes from time to time is they fail to realise “the other lot have moved on”. In my opinion the liberal party is still acting as if they are fighting Latham or Crean or Beazley. Rudd is clearly none of these, and is clearly much more of a astute political animal than the previous 3 labor leaders.
When you are at the zenith of your power as Howard was after winning in 2004, was exactly the time he should have been looking to change over to Costello. If you don’t change with the times and move on, the political inevitability will sure as hell bite you on the posterior. Labor have moved on, the liberals haven’t.
Dario @ #379
I thought Mark Vaile was a Stock and Station Agent aka Used Cow Salesman.
Including asking Keating to make him a Labor senator when Richo retired.
Glen @303
Electing Federal labour is an important step in getting rid of the NSW Labour government. They must go, but will NSW Libs get their act together? I doubt it, but hope springs eternal in an ageing breast. Same logic as to why Malcolm is safe, people want a competitive democracy
not lengthy periods of one party domination that obviously becomes a case of complacency and corruption. Mal is viewed as someone who a) is not a conservative christian (beazley, rudd, howard, costello etc etc) and b) maybe has a slightly broader view of society and life than Howard and the rump to which he has reduced the Libs.
Howard spoke with real honesty once that I recall, when he said he had no sympathy for Chikarovski because she did not do what it takes. What he also conveyed was ‘I will demean myself for power and THAT is my philosophy’. He believed he had the secret. Well, he didn’t, he had the same delusion as all the others. The Party did not have the guts to do what it should have done, dump him, they mistakenly allowed him to continue the fantasy that power resides in the individual. They should have gone the knife, not just for now but to encourage young liberal thinking Australians back to the liberal cause. He is the antithesis of what secular, young, entrepreneurial Australians want to be. This could be a difficult mistake to rectify unless the punters clear out some of the deadwood for you in a hurry (which they might).
I do hope the Libs get cleaned out good and proper and that Rudd gets rolled after one and a half terms and a new era of progressive younger social and economic thinkers comes through on both sides. I’m not optimistic, mainly because you lot have to find some new TALENT. The left is actually better off than it has been for a while, union and non-union background, and much of it not yet visible. As someone who thinks the bigger question is how do we re-balance the essential need for contest between equals in democracy you should be thinking about the talent problem as first order of business I reckon. Downer, Abbott, Nelson, Costello, Hawke and co. are not going to cut it, whether you lose this time or next. The risk for everyone is another 12-15 years of one party government.
But for now, you lot only have Himself to blame. If Howard understood Australia at all he would never have done what he did (Workchoices), or at least had the sense to be honest about why he was doing it (eliminate penalty rates and other conditions associated with a 5-day a week commercial society). He could have engineered greater labour market flexibility without manifest unfairness. But he actually believes his own crap about unions. Collectivization is not a productive negative, as any economist will tell you there is no basis for efficient contract without relatively equal bargaining power. Workchoices was not just culturally dumb, it is economically inefficient overall in the longer run. Anyone with any bargaining power will of course stay well clear of AWAs and are on common law contracts. Saving further money on the least able to bargain in a few service sectors (its not productivity either, tell me how getting rid of penalty rates gets a waiter to serve more plates) when the share of wages in overall wealth is already at a 30 year low is high risk stuff. Many in the Party understood that, but JWH knew best (or so he thought).
If someone had told me that the Australian left would end up in charge of a centralised industrial relations system EVER, I would have laughed. If there was one thing the Liberal party would never let happen that would be it. Wouldn’t it? So, has JWH been successful? You bet, he’s achieved what the unions, the ALP, the Fabians and everyone else never had a snowballs chance in hell of getting done. Nice work John. Thinking you and yours will rule for ever and a day, now that really is hubris!
Nicely broken down Dario.
One might argue that given that JWH feels we should achieve balance, having 70% of the Coalition shadow front bench negates the 70% unionists on the other side!
I take it you are referring to Nelson’s role as President of the AMA as evidence for him being a Unionist. Whilst the AMA is a very good professional association and protector of collective workers (and a powerful emploer’s organisation) I don’t think the ACTU is going to let them on the books any time soon.
I’d like to see the ALP pick up on the theme of how may lawyers there are on the Libs front bench. I’m a bit conflicted about the profession since i have a lawyer friend i care about very much, but i loath their profession as one of the most parasitic and useless of modern times. And a lot of people i know who have come into contact with them do as well.
Lawyers to me are a bit like nuclear weapons. Wastefully expensive to manufacture and maintain, ridiculously toxic in use, and the only real justification for their existence is that some other bugger might use one against you.
If they were cheaper then they would find it a lot easier to justify their existence i think. At least most Union official have actually been in the real world at some point in their lives.
SerfChoices is going to be the killer for Howard. Whichever way you look at it it has actually taken choices away from people. And what really gets people is when they see their kids shafted by an employer and can do little or nothing to help because of these laws.
Rattus hrattus is an ex-pollie walking. And i think, really, he knows it.
Remember Everyone:
VOTE EARLY, VOTE OFTEN
#353: Hughes would be a possible Labor gain, but certainly not Dunkley. What makes you think it possible, Adam?
The Term CHICKENHAWK is thrown around a lot in US politics.(would not work here as only labour potential members have ever had military service, so the forces of the RIECH LEADERSHIP must hold there breath)
Indeed CHICKENHAWK here in Australia it has a different meaning. A CHICKENHAWK here is a GLEN etc. Someone who does not advocate polices because his life experience is an example of them proving it true IE hard work diffedence study. BUT someone whose parents have with the aide of Labour ITS TIME polices has had there way smoothed to comfortville and so therefore can happly say the SUDANESE should get on with or get out.
Exactly, even for popular P.M.s like Hawke and Howard, eventually time runs out. Have a look at Hawke’s poll figures in 1990 – 1991, it was 50 / 35, L+NP / Labor on the primary vote. It seems Australians reached a point when they were pretty much sick of Hawke.
Typical Laurie Oakes…a clear cut Labor voter…
Why haven’t we heard from the National Party or the Minor Parties?
Blacburn at 380
When the PM starts getting referred to as a “silly old coot” by 78 year olds, things just aint looking too crash hot in the general scheme of things.
Suggestion for campaign song….
It’s Time
It’s time for freedom,
It’s time for moving, It’s time to begin,
Yes It’s time It’s time Australia,
It’s time for moving, It’s time for proving,
Yes It’s time
It’s time for all folk,
It’s time for moving, It’s time to give,
Yes It’s time
It’s time for children,
It’s time to show them, Time to look ahead,
Yes It’s time
Time for freedom,
Time for moving, Time to be clear,
Yes It’s time
Time Australia,
Time for moving, It’s time for proving,
Yes It’s time
Time for better,
Come together, It’s time to move,
Yes It’s time
Time to stand up,
Time to shout it, Time, Time, Time,
Yes It’s time
Time to move on,
Time to stand up, time to say ‘yes’,
Yes It’s time
______________________
Ok, Just kiddin’……at least an apparent majority are buying back into the sentiment – and have done since last December
As they say on Iron Chef – “Bang a Gong, Get it On!!”
How upset Labor voters will be if Howard wins a 5th term…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsYRQkmVifg&mode=related&search=
I have nothing new to say.
Except.
Johnny for PM.
May the best team win, and may god grace us by presenting more conservatives to debate on this blog in the next month. Otherwise I predict it won’t be long until I go absolutely nuts. One thing is for sure: I sure as hell will be avoiding my usua tradition of coming to this site on election night. Might go get drunk instead.
Or I’ll avoid it all and go campaigning for Mr X. Either or.
Cheers
Glenn (188),
The Victorian Government has reduced taxes as a percentage of gross state product by more than $2 billion since 1999 (from 5.8 per cent to 4.8 per cent). The states’ GST revenue, at 5 per cent of GDP, is the same proportion as the typical pre-GST federal revenue to the states and less than the highest pre-GST federal revenue to the states (7 per cent of GDP). The 2 per cent gap is around $20 billion that the states are not getting.
Barry #391 [I thought Mark Vaile was a Stock and Station Agent aka Used Cow Salesman.]
Yeah, he did that too. I could have listed more occupations for some of them but was trying to keep it simple. His last occupation before politics was a real estate agent I believe.
Blackburn @ 380
Thanks. Always informative, the elderly. Love “Silly old coot”. Haven’t heard that expression for years. When expressed, it carries deep meaning, I recall. Indicates distain.
All the best.
Caught a Coalition ad on Seven just now. Looked a bit cheap, frankly.
Howard-Costello v Rudd-Swan and Sharon Burrows. Prosperity etc.
They’ll need to do a bit better than that. How about some live video of Howard and Costello discussing the future together?
Dario,
Vaile worked for a stock and station agent for a time. He is said to have been not terribly successful. After doing the HSC he spent a long time as a Jackaroo (in the local ALP he is known as the “boundary rider”) before coming back to Wingham. Here’s a question for pedants – what school educated both our current Chief Justice and deputy PM? Clue : It’s not Joeys or Riverview.
He is one of the most fortunate politicians in Australia. He won the pre-selection for Lyne by 1 vote. In a three cornered contest he beat the third placed liberal by 2 votes on primaries and had an agreement from the liberal that he would not contest the result.
His stellar and unexpected rise in the ministry is well documented in William’s summary of the seat.
It just shows that in a democracy, you don’t have to be too bright to become a leader (thank God, we are not a nuclear power).
William,
What about splitting the threads into rants and psephology? If today’s any indication, at the end of 6 weeks you will have 41,000 posts but only about 5% will be on topic.
Glen says: “Yes lets have the Unions run Australia and lets have one party be in at all levels of Government and lets have a bloke who has less than 1 year of leadership experience and been in Parliament for less than 10 years as PM and lets have Julia Gillard as Deputy Prime Minister and lets have Wayne Swan as Treasurer.”
To which I answer, “yes let’s, sounds good to me.” Now I’m a Labor hack so you don’t care what I think, but that’s also the answer that between 55 and 60% of the electorate have been consistently giving all year. That’s exactly what they want – unions, Gillard, the premiers, the whole shebang. They just can’t wait. Glen, if you guys run this line for the next six weeks you will not just lose you will get thrashed. Don’t say you weren’t warned.
Re the GG girl who calls Rudd the girlyman.
Yes OH backwards.
Will she stand her ground as it shifts from under her
After all she in her family household was a Keating Girl
Much like Hillary who was a Goldwater Girl
But of course Hillary has amounted to something
and looks to amount to a lot more
OH JANET Rid yourself of your chains
AMOUNT 2 something beyound leaping mainstream leafy suburb marriage.
Saw the first government ads that are kicking out the campaign.
Starting with the “trust on the economy” theme you’d expect any incumbent to run hard on, but then completely destroyed the idea they were trying to project with a juvenile attack on Julia Gillard.
ESJ 387 [Wrong - Hockey and Minchin should be down as party hacks. Turnbull had done a number of things and McGauran should be down as landed gentry.]
Nah, they’re all lawyers. Of course, if you didn’t go around labelling anyone who came within 100 feet of a union as a ‘union official’ then you wouldn’t have this problem.
Clearly Adam if that is the only line we use then we will lose…the difference is what will be the Coalition’s policies and how popular they may be…you need negative and positive elements to a campaign…
The Liberals do have some good positive ads but they obviously arent running just yet…i would be very wary of anybody who likes having one party be in charge everywhere in a country that would destroy accountability…Adam will know exactly why we’ve heard nothing and will hear nothing from the Unions throughout the campaign because they know that if they start banging on about IR it will hurt KR that’s why we haven’t heard from the Union bosses for several months now…
I just signed up for Green corfluting tommorow – Whatch out Downer here we come!
David Briggs of Galaxy suggested on Seven News tonight that the Coalition has a 10% chance of winning the election and that the ALP could win as many as 10 seats in QLD.
I also just signed up for Bennelong corfluting Maxine WATCH OUT!
Sean
Dunkley was a pritty safe Labor seat not that recently,
the same as my neighbouring electorate of Hughes,
I think there is a very good chance they both could fall
If you ook at the lest state election in NSW,
Hughes is moslty the state seat of Menai, which is a Labor seat
I also hope to run as an independent in the seat of Graydnier – AA BOO!
Perhaps you should learn how to spell it first
Typical isn’t it? Extravagant to the point of being offensive when using taxpayers’ money for advertising. Stingy when using their own. Lousy Liberals!
Who am I? What am I getting at? A election …………..
() c=B
() c=B
() c=B
() c=B
()c=B
Get It?
WILLIAM perhaps you should moderate this penis
Glen the only people in this country these days who think the Unions are ‘EVIL’ and the sky will fall down if ex union reps are involved in governing the country are idiots like yourself who have no substantive basis for this scare campaign bulldust.
I hope JWH keeps prattling on about the ‘evil’ unions- it turns people off and in fact plays into Rudd’s hands because people now being screwed by WORKCHOICES will be wishing they WERE union members now and had some collective protection in place. Dohh, an own goal !!
Adam (410),
One of the fascinating things about the current Liberal Party is its inability to engage with reality. Every tactic it has tried this year has failed miserably, but it seems unable to move away. It and its supporters just have to keep telling us all about the “big bad unions” in the supposition that if the one hundredth time didn’t work, maybe the hundred and first would. I posted way earlier this year about how the Liberals had become a joke, rather than a serious campaigning force. Nothing since then has changed my mind. I still believe, as I stated months ago, that John Howard cannot win this election, but the other belief I expressed at the same time – that the Left could win it for him – isn’t going to happen either. That leaves one possibility – Kevin Rudd losing it – and that is also extremely unlikely, despite his tendency to blame the poor old staff.
Glen
The unions have not been advertising because the Govt has been doing their job for them.
The ads will start very soon, we will also see others, for example the disabled lobby group have nominated seats where the disabled vote is enough to change govt seats. (15 Seats !!).
The perfect electoral storm is brewing, you cannot ignore sizeable group who want to see the end of this Govt.
Dunkley has never been a safe ALP seat, its allway been marginal seat terriorty centred on Franga (Frankston)
A useless stat the seat covering Frankston has only returned an ALP member on the following occasions, I may have missed one (1929-1952 by-election-1984-1987-1993)
THE HARD TRUTH FOR RIGHT WINGERS IS only the left in true democarys wins WARS
Curtain in Australia
IN THE US Roosevelt etc.
Menzies was a running scared coward much like JONNIE helleo in Vietnam
BUSNIES can’t win wars.
Only the left with the crazy right ( hoping for facism if they get in power) behind them can prevail
GLEN GLEN
if u guys had had your way we would be speaking Jap
BEFORE U ASK MY FAMILY GAVE AT THE FRONT
Between 1984 to 2001 the seat of Dunkley didn’t swing by more than 1.9% either way
If you’ve not seen the ads they can be seen here:
http://www.liberal.org.au/info/multimedia/detail/20071014_TheEconomyisCentraltoEverything.php
http://www.liberal.org.au/info/multimedia/detail/20071014_ReasonstoVoteLiberal.php
Molotov
Wise instructions. May I add: WEAR A CARDIGAN OR A JUMPER WITH POCKETS. TAKE YOUR OWN PEN.
oakeshott country at 409
We’re right off topic here, but it is Joey’s, is it not?
1 must think of the snake that tells the rat that he by swallowing him will keep him warm
IF YOU REALLY CARE ABOUT OUR COUNTRY FUTURE
_____ YOU WILL watch the cricket India are doing well no wickets down
paisano @ #393 – Great post.
#430 James J
Sheesh, those ads are like wet lettuce., Libs must be broke
Just saw the first of the liberal ads on TV. They are re-hashing the ‘L’ campaign. Will anybody buy into it this time?
No Just alarmed – Surprisingly it’s St Joseph’s Primary School, Wingham ( Run By the Black Joeys)
In regards to the: ‘Why doesnt Labor highlight that 2/3 of Howard’s team are lawyers’?
This is an easy one…and it’s the same kind of thinking that got Latham in trouble in 2004. Why alienate the entire legal industry just to reinforce your vote with your voter base? Howard can demonise ‘union bosses’ all he wants because the chance of a union official voting Liberal is incredibly low. However even if a majority of lawyers vote Lib, there’s likely a solid minority who do or might vote Labor.
Only caveat I can think of is that it [mentioning the lawyers] may work a bit better in rural electorates.
Better to ignore it and focus the debate on your strengths.
Possum at #343 – Where did you hear that the Taverner poll was taken only in Melbourne & Sydney? My hard copy Sun-Herald says 979 voters in NSW & Victoria – their website also says NSW & Vic without the number.
The “union bosses” line would only work with the already rusted-on over 50s Libs, surely. Militant unionism has been unheard of for decades.
And can I just say how delighted I am to see snakes finally receiving their deserved level of commentary here. I can’t wait to tell Snakegirl.
ROTFL …..
Ok, I will bite. We know he is a rat, that has been proven. Lets just call him a rat and leave it at that ;-D
393 Paisano “but hope springs eternal in an ageing breast” Que?
oakeshott country at 437. Right. We’re at cross purposes. That’s the one I meant (not the “apparently” famous one at Hunter’s Hill). Vaile went to Taree High so it had to be primary.
Excuse my ignorance but what does “;-D” mean?
# 443 – Alexander Pope – “Hope springs eternal in the human breast”.
Gary Bruce 445, it is called an emoticon. Tilt your head ninety degrees to the left to look and it portrays a wink and broad smile.
Sorry but that’s just silly. If we’re going to have a debate can we at least be sensible.
Gary Bruce
Excuse my ignorance but what does “;-D†mean?
Change the D to ) and you get one of these
http://www.theage.com.au/news/federalelection2007/howards-run-the-good-the-bad-the-taxing/2007/10/13/1191696241362.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2
Thanks Eddie.
Go growth. Go Liberal.
Uh-oh. That’s going to get them in trouble.
Testing –
Oakshot at 409,
Didn’t Vaile and Gleeson go to Wingham public school, what’s now known as Wingham Brush School?
I’m a sort of a local, so I’m probably cheating here
The point about unions is not that we wil have the CFMEU in power but that a totally unrepresentative group will be calling the shots. Instead of a comparison with lawyers the proper comparison would be like the current cabinet being comprised of 13 members of the Country Women’s Association.
Unions are rent seekers – ie seeking to extract a rent from productive activity just like lawyers. The difference is lawyers remain relevant because people will always seek to minimise risk by having a lawyer involved in a transaction – the role of unions has declined as their purpose has declined in the economy.
Fairness in employment does not require a $100 milliion industrial arbitration system and statutory rights for trade unions – it can be done much more simply. Labor has of course recognised the necessary changes with forward with fairness which is really workchoices lite. So it shouldnt be that much of an issue in the election campaign.
To Glen: 414
You say:
“i would be very wary of anybody who likes having one party be in charge everywhere in a country that would destroy accountability”
So, you are a supporter of the accountability of governments?? I think your side of politics are about to get enough accountability via the electorate to last you a while mate.
Howard wants us all to believe that he is the man responsible for all the good things (like the state of the economy, when actually that was PJK), but has had nothing to do with any of the less than good.
He has dodged accountability while in office since early in his 1st term.
As a union member and someone who was on the picket once or twice i was understanding when a deal was done to end the 98 wharf dispute betwixt the MUA and Patricks, without it going to a full clown conspiracy trial for Corrigan, Rieth, and Howard. After all, the MUA was trying, foremost to protect as many of its members jobs as they could. But if it had gone to trial back then, what a different Australia we would have now!! Howard and Rieth were in it up to their necks all the time that they were professing no prior knowledge to the people and the parliament.
Then there was Children Overboard. As a man, Howard must be haunted by this. But did he correct the record during the campaign? No, he maintained the skeer as best he could.
Irag, WMD, took us into a war we didn’t need that will go down in history as one of the truly great strategic blunders, ever.
David Hick’s detention. Threw one of our own (not the best of us, but one of ours none the less) to the dogs because he was too gutless to say boo to the Shrub.
AWB?? Happened on your watch mate. Give money to Saddam on the sly so that he can buy guns to shoot as us and our mates.
Howard has taken responsibility for none of these. Its always someone else or too hard to determine.
He has taken responsibility for SerfChoices though and look where thats taking them!
Well, now its 2007, game on, a large dose of accountability about to drop from on high. Run Rattus Run!!
CB at 439,
Sydney and Melbourne thing comes from here:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/race-is-on-as-virgin-voters-go-for-rudd/2007/10/13/1191696241329.html
All this talk about Howard and his Liberal Lawyers reminds one of the old joke about, ” What do you call 70% of Howard’s Cabinet chained together at the bottom of the Ocean?”
A bloody good start!
They don’t say that about Union Officials.
386
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
Ah Lefty E
I dont think anyone who has followed JWH would disagree that he has always supported Labor market deregulation..
….
And what have we now: certainly not de-reguslation. We have a key part of people’s lives thrown into uncertainty: a labour market that has been bureaucratised. John Howard has replaced over 100 years of law, practice and understanding of labour relations and replaced it with a bureaucratic fix. It is a shambles and is anything but de-regulation. He should be and will be condemned for his ideological fantasy tour.
I think the term ‘Go for growth’ sounds more like an ad for viagra. And I’m sorry, there is no one on either side of politics that helps me with ‘growth’.
Rudd answered all these Lib stock mantra’s very well, he’s on a roll
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/election-gets-personal-from-day-1/2007/10/14/1192300583292.html
Wot’s a ROTFL? Excuse ignorance.
BO – justify your assertion “people’s lives thrown into uncertainty”. That’s just plain wrong.
“Yes lets have the Unions run Australia and lets have one party be in at all levels of Government and lets have a bloke who has less than 1 year of leadership experience and been in Parliament for less than 10 years as PM and lets have Julia Gillard as Deputy Prime Minister and lets have Wayne Swan as Treasurer.â€
Where do I queue?
But, piece by piece:
“have one party be in at all levels of Government”
Meh, the Liberals still have the Brisbane Lord Mayorality – for now.
“lets have a bloke who has less than 1 year of leadership experience and been in Parliament for less than 10 years as PM”
Two words: Bob Hawke. Had four weeks leadership experience and 2 years in Parliament when he became PM. He was quite successful.
“lets have Julia Gillard as Deputy Prime Minister”
Just what is it about Julia Gillard that gets Liberals so fired up? Is it the voice (clearly not the product of a Swiss Finishing School where the Liberal women go)? Is it the fact that she is a …woman? Is it because she can go cop it, and then dish it out with interest?
“lets have Wayne Swan as Treasurer.”
Ans what’s the problem with Swan? The way some people carry on, you’d think he was Che Guevera. He’ll be a great Treasurer. Like Costello, he’ll be able to master his brief, but unlike Costello, Swan will have thoughts of his own – shock, horror!.
Is this guy for real, I thought he was describing Howard or maybe he is just wearing blinkers:
Piers Akerman : Why Rudd is not fit to rule
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22579837-5007146,00.html
Rolling On The Floor Laughing
Derek,
Roll on the floor laughing.
Howard’s pitch “like me, or loathe me, at least you know what I stand for” is similar to Keating’s election slogan in 1996 “Leadership”. It was based on the assumption that you may think Keating was a bit arrogant, but at least he took tough decisions. It is ironic that Howard is now reverting to Keating’s flawed election strategy.
ROTFL @ ESJ
ESJ
If you can be sacked because your boss had a bad day, or because he/she woke up on the wrong side of the bed, or whatever surely you have an uncertain work life.
This is especially true for unskilled workers – who do vote.
Liberal ads are on youtube for those you cant bring themselves to visit the liberal website.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=T3XTLzvSvLM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ_NeVtkXJ0
ESJ
to you anyone who disagree with howards is a unionist-you’ve spent weeks accusing me
all i can say is
UNIONS BOO
Howard and Rudd are on 60 Minutes.
The Labor Party should just use John Howards 2004 advertisements.
“WHO DO YOU TRUST TO KEEP INTEREST RATES LOW??”
Would go great guns with another interest rate rise set for November 9th.
@ 443 Chris B
Alexander Pope mangled by me to mean I hope I see a healthy democratic contest before I die. Which probably won’t be long as I’m no spring chicken.
As usual, the Liberal Party advertisements are dishonest.
By concentrating on government debt, which in any case is not “zero”, they ignore net foreign debt. This is what they exploited so deceitfully in 1996, when they claimed that it was a huge problem. It’s three times bigger now, but do they ever mention it? Of course not.
Furthermore, it is simply wrong to suggest that government borrowing, in a globalised economy, puts ‘upward pressure’ on interest rates. The extent to which this would be the case is infinitessimal.
These advertisements are rubbish.
hmmm while we are in chat from decades ago
LMAO
LMFAO
LOL
WTF
I’d like to make a little comment about this tit for tat over one lot being full of union officials, and the other lot being full of lawyers…
It’s a sad fact these days that, for people in many professions, it’s cirtually impossible to make a straightforward transition into politics. If you are a teacher, nurse, academic, defence force member, police officer…the list goes on…you have an “office for profit under the Crown” and you may have to quit your job to campaign. Such people are certainly unlikely to run in a seat they can’t win, just to get experience.
If you run a small business, it’s very hard to spend the time required on campaigning, unless it’s very profitable and you can afford staff to replace you.
If you’re a shift worker – as more and more people are these days – you will not be able to attend the meetings required.
If you’re a mother, it is difficult to find the child care while campaigning, and even harder if you get elected.
Really, the only people for whom it is relatively easy to move into politics are union officials (because their union supports the ALP) or lawyers (who are well-paid and independently emplyed, and whose businesses can keep running without them), plus a limited number of other professions, including farmers. You need money and back-up staff to make a decent go of it these days.
Both union delegates and lawyers bring skills to politics that are useful. But so would so many other trades and professions, if given the chance. Where are the carpenters? The shop assistants? The nurses? The school principals? The engineers? The train drivers (paging Ben Chifley)? The video shop proprietors? The chefs?
The whole of politics needs to be more family friendly, and people in the public service need to be allowed to stand for parliament more easily, before we’ll get a government that represents us more accurately.
Good to see David Briggs is so pessimistic about the Coalition’s chances, rating them only a 10% prob to win, as he’s been the most pro-Coalition pollster.
PeterG Government is not responsible for foreign debt by they are for Commonwealth debt…
60 Minutes what a joke why dont they just come out and say they are backing Rudd Tara Brown asked Howard if he feared defeat 4 times…for christs sake!
Just watched the Rodent & Rudd on 37 Minutes Channel 9. It seemed to me that Rudd was certainly asked tougher & more personal questions (strippers & being married to a multimillionaire etc) than the Rodent. However Rudd came across as more energetic, passionate & relaxed. The Rodent seemed nervous, hesitant, tired and pleading.
Am I too biased? How did they come across in your opinion?
The Galaxy Poll must be bad for Briggs to say that.
Glenn, Tara is just being realistic
Glen,
Tara Brown is the softest journo they have. She’s a powder puff who usually interviews celebrities. If Howard can’t handle her he should be ashamed of himself. To complain that she is too tough is absurd.
She’s not tough but she spent half the interview asking Howard whether he could win and whether he feared losing typical media bias…
Um, this isn’t what the Liberals said for all of the 1980s. I guess that makes them hypocrites.
I didn’t switch over in time to see Howard’s interview, but I didn’t think they were soft on Rudd. They came straight out and said ‘Mini-Howard’, ‘Me-too” and “Glass Jaw”…although the interview was too short to really press the point. I thought Rudd dealt with it pretty well.
I’m happy parliament didnt go back, I think another shouting match wouldn’t go well for him.
Glen,
You’re a wimp if you think that was a tough interview. Better throw in the towel if Tara scares you.
If she was tough she would have asked whether Howard’s favourite Dylan song was “Knockin on Heaven’s Door”.
Can I just say I’ll support any party that bans smiley faces on the internet!
Meanwhile, the election really must be on. I spotted my first Vote 1 – Martin Ferguson poster in Northcote today. Holy plebiscite, Batman!
And Glen questioned earlier why he hadn’t heard anything from the Nats or the minor parties. Well Glen, in the space of one five-minute ABC Radio news bulletin this afternoon, I heard them all. The Nats were talking about rural health and better highways/rail, Lyn Allison was complaining about personal atacks in politics during the campaign, Bob Brown was calling on people to stop one party getting a Senate majority, and Stephen Fielding said something or other which has failed to remain in my mind.
But of course that was the ABC, which you should discount because of its outrageous pro-Liberal bias.
Labour ad on interest rates:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBQzSDx1lVk
ESJ saith: ‘Fairness in employment does not require a $100 milliion industrial arbitration system and statutory rights for trade unions – it can be done much more simply’
You have a very limited understanding of the various roles unions play, and no understanding of the economic arguments for them. The most important of which is monitoring, enforcement and education in relation to workplace rights, customs and grievances. Moreover they do so on a broad social insurance version of the user pays principle.
The Workplace Authority, Ombudsman and industrial registries will need several thousand staff to even touch that role, and yet will do so with all the inefficiencies and informational insensitivities of bureaucracies. And they will do so at great cost to taxpayers – why shouldn’t workers pay directly for the bodies that monitor conditions in their industries?
lols at all u peeps. Use have no idea wtf is going on do u?
lmao
gtg, c u soon
(ahh that brings back memories)
Debate details released
Place: Great Hall, Parliament House
Time 7:30 next Sunday
Moderator: David Speers
Duration 90 minutes
God not that dill.
This is what Ray Martin gets for agreeing to host Labor fundraisers.
Yes, Howard looked tired and very uncomfortable in that interview.
Overall, Day One to ALP
90 Minutes!?
God spare us all.
Rudd came across as more genuine and energetic, but I’m a biased Labor supporter, so I’m probably not the most objective observer.
One word of advice to Kev: he should talk a lot more about his experience as a small businessman and diplomat, so he can effectively blunt Howard’s criticism that he’s too inexperienced to be PM.
who is broadcasting the debate? And is Costello going to be apart of it, since we have to vote for Howard+Costello vs Rudd?
It will be broadcast on 9, ABC and 7. 10 will be showing the hilarious teen comedy Weird Science.
I think Sky News is broadcasting it, not sure about free to air
Heard it on Sky News
477
jasmine_Anadyr Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
hmmm while we are in chat from decades ago
LMAO
……
and, for the inexpressible: !@@#$%^
Graeme @ 491
Very good point. The latest Workplace Authority add could be changed to a union ad simply by putting a union logo at the end. The things they argue they are there to do are mostly things unions have been doing for a lot longer [and on a more 'liberal' user-pays system rather than all taxpayers footing the bill!]
Of course the free to air stations will broadcast it. If they don’t, Rudd and Howard wouldn’t bother turning up.
Testing –
Spiers would have been Howards choice. He’ll favour Johnny for sure.
What happened to another week in Parliament – the key weapon in the government’s arsenal against Rudd?
Given the attacks on Beazley for getting names wrong…remember those “senior moments”?…why hasn’t anyone picked up Howard for calling Grace Grace “Mister Grace”?
Spiros,
It was bulldust.
I know that may surprise you.
Still Snakeboy it was better than Rudd saying he would stay as PM for ‘1 year’ and then smacking the microphones lol!
And now the drought will break!!
Snakeboy, I glad you mentioned the Grace Grace comment. I was sure he said “Mister Grace”, but when I read no commentary on it, I thought I must have misheard. I suspect the Courier Mail will mention it….as a “gaffe”.
Howard is probably a big fan of “Are You being Served?”, with “young Mr Grace” and “old Mr Grace”. Though I doubt he was a fan of Captain Peacock.
And KT…stop it. All smiley faces should be quarantined on Nauru.
Antonio –
(sorry, I’ll try to restrain myself in the future)
As for David Spiers – since somebody else in my household insists on continually watching Sky News, I am constantly exposed to him and Kieran Gilbert attempting to do political commentary. Of course, they can’t restrain themselves and in the end, they sound like a pair of Liberal schoolboys engaging in political fellatio. I’m not a fan of debates (they’re typically insufferably tedious), and I am most definitely avoiding this one now.
La Nina, remember that Bob Hawke broke the 82-83 drought. and history shows that Australia has been in drought more often in the last 30 years under Coalition governments than under Labor governments.
I wonder if a change of Liberal leader, eg Costello, could break the drought, without the need for a change of government. While the current government is handing out so much drought relief, it’s in the drought’s interest to continue.
well that’s 500 comments of rants, facts and interesting opinions – with most focus on change, or lack there of, I wonder of a certain man who might make this an interesting election…
Nick Xenophon
He certainly made SA 2006 an interesting election… perhaps that’s why they call it a festive state. Any predictions on this man getting a Senate spot? [He's quite the SA upper house and in 2006 polled just over 20% of the upper house vote. I bet Bob Katter would be jealous of that number for him and his coalition of independants.]
I reckon 3 situations will happen in the Senate Race for South Aus…
3 Labor 2 Liberal 1 – Xenophon
2 Labor 2 Liberal 1 Green 1 – Xenophon
2 Labor 3 Liberal 1 Green
It could be the ‘X’ factor is all hype… which will see the Greens pick up the protest and minor party vote pushing them into 5th spot with FF preferences pushing Liberals 3rd Candidate into 6th spot – which is the last scenario. However, if the Liberals are terribly on the nose in SA and the ‘X’ factor pulls through, expect one of the first two scenarios with 3rd Labor Candidate and a Greens candidate fighting it out for 6th spot.
379
Dario Says:
Abbott – Journalist
Abbott has an economics/law degree.
Another lawyer, and a Jesuitical one at that.
Wash your mouth out possum (454), Vaile and Gleeson are both left footers – they went across the road from Wingham Brush.
This is the most likely scenario. Xenophon has killed off any chance of the Greens winning the last seat. I don’t think he will get 20% of the vote, but 15% isn’t out of the question.
Xenophon is anti-WorkChoices as well, so he could be out there endorsing Labor candidates, especially Mia Handshin in Sturt.
In fact, Premier Mike Rann and attorney general Michael Atkinson were important in convincing him to run for the senate.
The Liberals win the moronic TV advert award. They have sent their adverts to the TV station in non-anamorphic format, so they play at the middle of the screen, instead of filling the entire frame.
Oaky at 516, what, they went to school in a big log?
Well they’d be in good company…. did so myself!
ShowsOn – then who is left to fill his spot in the SA UpperHouse? Just out of curiosity. I agree that is the most likely situation – hence i put it first. Would be nice to see Nick in the Senate. Pity he won’t be joined by Andren. Mind you, for the seat of Macquarie, I do think Labor might have a chance with Bob Debus. I was shocked to see his campaign posters in Bathurst shop windows… when he was only recently A-G of NSW. It will be close. I think it’ll be a swing of about 6-9% which in the latter will just knock off Bartlett.
Macquarie is now a notional Labor seat, so a swing of 6-9% would be a comfortable victory for Debus
Possum
you were lucky- you had a big log
we had hole in ground
Politics_Obsessed, Macquarie has been redistributed and is now a notionally safe Labor seat. Bob Debus should have no problems being elected.
Any links to the comments made by David Briggs today?
If Briggs is saying that the Libs have a 10% chance of winning, they’re well and truly stuffed.
Rudd came across the best ive seen him in his 60 mins interview, he was relaxed, laughing and well— normal/human, nothing studied or formal, he didnt shirk the hard questions, he took them all honestly with good grace, it certainly wont do him any harm.
will we know whats in Galaxy tonight? ok, i know i’m addicted.
Does anyone know which union Alan Griffin used to work for?
i know sorry fellas – i got mixed between my two seats that were split over calare – but still i reckon there’s a swing around that high with some people I’ve talked to in and around Bathurst ..
The talk in the local papers is that the S.A. state constitution is so ambiguous that the government could appoint whoever they want (i.e. a Labor candidate), because they have the numbers at the joint sitting of both houses.
HOWEVER, the conventional approach (setting aside 1975) is that the goverment should endorse whoever Xenephon nominates. This is currently the 3rd candidate on his 2006 ticket, John Darley, a former valuer general in the S.A. government.
Howard wants a debate next sunday.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=305484
I do hope that announced debate structure is not finalised. An Audience free single debate hosted by a Sky News political commentator? I look forward to questions such as “Mr Rudd, just how much do you love Terror – To the bottom of your heart, or just heaps and heaps?” And “Mr Howard, your campaign seems to have the momentum of a runaway freight train…”
Howard will one and only one debate, so he can’t be accused of dodging, and he will want it early, so that there will be time for people to forget if he gets thrashed, which he probably will.
One question I do have – Is is standard that the government of the day elects the conditions that the debate is held under? While not overestimating the importance of the debate, surely it would be better to have an agreed upon standardized format each election?
I think all of you guys are being a bit harsh on David Speers and Sky News – from my opinion, they seem to at least try to be objective. Speers has always come across as a reasonable commentator – not a subjective hack but not spectacular either (but I don’t think that’s a necessary prerequisite to someone being an effective political commenator)
The Legend Of The Rainbow Rodent
Once upon a time in our Great Southern Land there lived a creature with the body of a snake and the head of a rat. Behind its two flashing incisors(one gold-rimmed) lurked a forked tongue.
When the Rainbow Rodent parted its jaws to speak, it emitted a sound ‘twixt a hiss and a squeak.
I really don’t know much about this Xenophon chap, apart from the fact he doesn’t like pokies and he seems pretty popular in S.A.
Can someone please give me the potted version on where he stands on major issues like education, the environment and health?
Thanks!
{Prime Minister John Howard wants to debate Labor leader Kevin Rudd just one week into the election campaign.
He is proposing the live audience debate take place in the Great Hall of Parliament House next Sunday, moderated by Sky News’ political editor David Speers.
ADVERTISEMENT
In a letter to ALP national secretary Tim Gartrell, Liberal Party federal director Brian Loughnane queried Mr Rudd’s availability for the debate and set out the terms under which it would occur.
A panel of five senior journalists, chosen by both parties and the National Press Club, would take part but there was no indication audience participation would be involved.}
http://au.news.yahoo.com/071014/2/14o7f.html
Very interesting day. Rishworth corflutes are YR@W orange which makes it look like shes part of it. Richardson is now calling me a union ALP stooge and not a true Green! Considering that i have been a member of the Greens for approx 6 years and was a Democrat before that dont know where hes coming from. If i was a ALP stooge you would think i would be getting help from them or that other ALP front the YR@W group but im not.
Game ON!
It’s Spiers, right? My television appears to have attached itself to the ABC and resists any attempt at change. It has never heard of Sky. I imagine this important event in our political history will be covered by our national broadcaster, for nix.
Surely there must be an audience, if only so there can be a ‘worm’? Surely there will be a national outcry if the ‘worm’ is silenced?
I do hope Rudd pushes back and demands two debates the second well into the campain. If Howard refuses every shadow minister can accuse howard of being scared and wanting to get the debating over quickly.
I don’t know why Richardson bothers. He might as well spend the campaign in Tahiti.
Lom,
Here’s his web page:
http://www.xen.net.au/html/why.html
Mr X seems to be pushing the SA water barrow. A certain vote winner.
And here’s his namesake:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophon
Rudd should only agree to it if he can have another two debates on his terms at the end of week 3 and the end of week 4.
Yep Derek, and with the debate you’ll be getting only slightly less than what you paid for it (is it still 8c a day?)
I believe it was an explicit condition of the Liberals that there be no worm for the debate – I guess it wouldn’t look good for the worm to fall whenever Howard talked about himself!!!
I wouldnt be surpised if Morgan runs a post-debate Morgan Reactor worm over it the next day.
Actually, why does Rudd need a debate? He’s the one with the huge lead in the polls, he’s got a high profile in the electorate and isn’t the Government the party going around claiming that Rudd is a policy lightweight? Surely, Rudd has the stronger bargaining position in regards to the debate(s)?
So Howard wants the worm silenced! Gives a clear indication of how he expects the debate will go.
Also a 90 minute debate in the first week – its as if its designed not to be seen by the 18-30 demographic.
Yes, we’re apparently all union bosses now.
And I agree with the consensus, given today’s opening performances, Rudd should push for several more debates (with no infantile Sky News people either).
It’s just Howard trying to look as though he is on the front foot and leading the debate right from the start of the campaign.
Personally, I don’t think Howard will be able to keep up with Rudd if he sets the pace and agenda of the campaign. Howard’s age and stamina would be sorely tested and I think he will start to fade fairly quickly.
If that is the case, he is likely to become increasingly desperate and more likely to make mistakes which open the door for Rudd to take full advantage of.
Grilled Rodent for the Snake Man.
Rudd should flatly reject Speers as moderator.
I believe Nick Xenophon’s name is actually Xenophou and that at one stage was a member of the Liberal Party but these days is an independent and if anything does have a leaning tpwards the ALP.
Can anyone confirm the poll schedule?
My assumptions/calculations:
Newspoll out tomorrow, tomorrow night on ABC or Tuesday?
Morgan 19/10
Galaxy 22/10
Morgan 26/10
Thanks
Oldtimer,
That’s the “traditional” pre-campaign timetable. I’m sure during the campaign there’ll be polls coming out more frequently (and from some other polling organisations, such as YouGov and Taverner).
As such, we’re all expecting some form of Galaxy poll out tomorrow, with the Newspoll coming out on Tuesday (or Monday night through Lateline). After that, it’s anyone’s guess…
No worm? Australian’s have come to love the worm. Rudd should make a note of it all week that Howard doesn’t want people to see the worm.
Fellow pseph watchers,
I wanted to take a moment to wish all the best to all bloggers on this site for the next six weeks.
Its “game on” as far as I can see and the result will have more relevence to the core of Australian values than anything that has come before since WWII.
should I declare an interst or just keep lurking?
ShowsOn @ 517
“… non-anamorpic hic format …”
What does that mean? Is it a cock up? I like technical stuff.
Those Liberal ads are seriously lame-o.
For some reason the ‘Pro-growth’ slogan is hilarious. Makes me think of Howard’s eyebrows.
And that vox pop one is totally full of blokes. 9 out of 10. Surely thats a bit of an own goal.
Now I know Rudd will win, Howard has started thinking with his gut, rather than his brain:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,22585251-5005962,00.html
Declare an interest Mr Squiggle!
And Hurrrrry Uuuuuup :mrgreen”
This election could shape up as a good test of the “Sawford Formula”.
A good chance the next inflation figure will be up and result in an interest rise on November 10th.
The unemployment figure is right out of the equation.
I have once again gone through the occupational backgrounds of the Shadow Cabinet using the Parliament website and Wikipedia. By my count 12 members of the Shadow Cabinet are former union office-holders, either elected officials or appointed officials such as organisers. Another seven have at some time worked for a union, as an advocate, research officer etc. Thirteen have as far as I can discover never held office in or worked for a union. Thus: 13 (33%) have been union officials, or “union bosses” as the Libs like to call them, 7 (23%) have worked for a union, and 13 (43%) have never done either. So where does this 70% figure come from? It’s a total lie as far as I can see. I have drawn up a table here:
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/backgrounds.shtml
I would welcome any additional information or corrections.
I can see why Labor have not bothered arguing the “70%” figure, because they don’t want to give oxygen to Howard’s propaganda. But someone in the media ought to have pinged the Libs on this blatant lie. Incidentally, the 43% includes Rudd, Gillard, Swan, Smith, McClelland, Fitzgibbon, Macklin, Albanese, Emerson and Garrett – most of the tall timber of the Shadow Cabinet.
The election is the 24th, should be declared soon after, but how long after? Do they have to wait a couple of weeks for all the postal, absentee votes?
Will Howard still get his last Christmas at Kirrilbilli, if the election is not declared until early-mid December he may have trouble moving out before Christmas, unless maybe he gets some volunteers to help him move?
If I were Rudd I wouldn’ to go anywhere near a debate. Howard can debate well inside and outside the House of Reps.
He will hold his own ground, come across as tired and boring but same old same old. No, gain , no loss. He wont be expecting to do a messianic shift in popular opinion on the strength of a debate.
What he will be hoping to do an ‘enough rope’ on Rudd; give him an opportunity to damage the Labor and Rudd brand. Dangerous territory if you ask me.
However, if Rudd dosen’t have the ‘chops’ to stand his ground and debate well he dosen’t deserve to be PM anyway: it will test him and that’s a good thing. Ok, bring on the debate and see how he goes.
Opps, maths was never my strong point. The correct numbers are 12 (40%), 5 (17%), 13 (43%).
Labor will do well in WA – Premier Carpenter has just donated to the Annual Telethon $1,000,000 because it’s the 40th Anniversary of the event. Normally the WA Govt gives a couple of hundrand grand.
Bluebottle,
JWH got slaughtered (I think that’s the appropriate verb) by Latham and Beazley in their debates in 2004 and 2001. From what I recall, the margins of victory were around 65/35.
Of course, both Latham and Beazley needed the debate more than Rudd – they were either behind (in Beazley’s case) or on level pegging with the PM (Latham) at the time of the debate, but both needed an opportunity to look prime-ministerial. Rudd has been doing this for the better part of a year, he already holds a commanding lead in the polls and people seem to consider him prime-ministerial material already. The only reason why he should debate is that if he doesn’t, he looks chicken…
Actually, it was $100,000 from the WA Govt Plus the $1 Million as well as a Personal Donation from the Carpenter Family.
The WA Opposition also donated, but the amount wasn’t disclosed.
Ideally you want the broadcast image of an advertisment to fill the entire area of a 16:9 widescreen TV. Or appear letterboxed (with black bars at the top and bottom) on an old non-widescreen (4:3) TV.
However what the Liberals have done is send their ads to the TV stations as a 4:3 letterboxed image with black bars on the tape, rather than a “widescreen TV ready” 16:9 anamorphic image (which will be displayed properly irrespective of the TV it is viewed on).
This means their adverts occupy a small space at the centre of the screen, with blackbars around the entire image. In other words, when viewed on a widescreen TV, the image looks like this:
http://gregl.net/images/anamorphic/2.35_on_16×9.gif
When it should look like this:
http://gregl.net/images/anamorphic/2.35_anamorphic_on_16×9.gif
More explanation here:
http://gregl.net/videophile/anamorphic.htm
It just means the image is much smaller (I think by 25%) than it needs to be.
I would’ve thought the TV stations could convert everything to anamorphic 16:9, but they seem to just broadcast adverts in whatever format they receive them in. There is no reason today to broadcast anything non-anamorphic.
Excuse me? The premier’s family personally gave a million dollars? Is that what you meant to say?
Is it Spiers? Speers? Or spears at fifty paces? Or is this just simply the old thing of never naming an enemy?
Edward StJohn Says:
No, the inital donation from the WA Govt was $100,000 THEN there was the $Million Dollar donation.
The Family gave $1,000
I am interested in the discussion about Nick Xenophon. All along people have been assuming that he will poll 14-20% (well, not many are calling 20% but there you have it…).
Consider the case of the WA Nationals. At the last WA State Election they ran in 14 out of 57 seats, and polled a statewide average of 3.69%. Yet at their last serious statewide tilt at the Senate (2001) with former state leader Hendy Cowan running they polled only 2.35%. Hendy had profile being a former Deputy Premier, was well known in the rural areas, and the Nats ran HoR’s candidates in 4 electorates covering rural districts.
There does not seem to be a necessary correlation between Xenophon’s vote in the Leg Council and a potential vote in the Senate. Notwithstanding his own position, he also pulled up Ann Bressington, who has not been so well received from what I hear. I note that the Lib vote dropped (between 2002 & 2006) from 40% to 25% which seems to suggest that Xenophon pulled a lot of Liberal/conservative votes his way, perhaps as a protest against the Liberal Party itself in the 2006 election. Certainly the ALP vote in the Council went up over that period – from 33 to 36%.
So, just as some will argue you can’t take ALP-Lib state results (by-elections or general elections) and transfer them to the federal sphere, I think we should apply the same here. I do also note that Xenophon originally polled 2.86% in 1997.
The Age has a very nice interactive electorate map on their election website:
http://www.theage.com.au/multimedia/federalelection_map/index.html
Adam. the Liberals add portrays Julia Gillard as a Union hack!
Pretty poor form. They wouldn’t want to mislead the Australian public at all would they?
Swing. If Howard did so poorly in 2001 and 2004 why would he agree to another debate..I dont recall him being flogged, but your memory is better than mine. If its been bad for him in the past, his only motive must be to give Rudd ‘enough rope’ and hope he hangs himself on something ?
Hi Poss’m,
My declared interest is that I was once a payed up member of the liberal party which is how I will vote on in late november.
If I get around to it, I will pay me fees again. I’m currently registered in the elctorate of Higgins, so if I get around to it, I’ll offer to hand out HTV cards on the day
I have no special interest now, although I have a varied family history which has, over time, formed part of how I vote. For example,
10 year ago my farther stood for the Greens in a bayside Melbourne marginal
60 years ago my Great grandfather was premier of NSW. I’m told he was a class mate of Menzies, but I’ve never checked it out.
In a distant tree of ‘d’ family’ there lurks about 1/2 doz Parer’s (inlcuding Senators, WWII photographers, early aviators etc0
(seriosly…its all true)
All in all, family connnections considered, my main conclusion these days is
“its hard to smell when you have a pencil for a nose”
good luck eveyone, we’ll meet you on the other side
The debates are pretty irrelevant. As long as neither side does anything crazy (eg. cries) it’ll have no impact at all.
Gillard appeared for unions as a lawyer. That doesn’t make her a union hack, boss or anything else. Appearing as a lawyer for a murderer doesn’t make one a murderer. So far as I can find out, she has never worked directly for a union. Correct me if I’m wrong, please.
To me there is a real going through the motions feel to that advert. It is just lets touch on three things, economy, experience, unions. It is just a generic Liberal attack advert that they would probably run at any election.
Mr Squiggle
Don’t wriggle. Declare interest. Tell us your story …
Scorpio the ALP/Unions have been misleading the Australian public with their advertising for the past 2 years.
Thommo, I’ll bite and ask what is particularly misleading about the union ads? Apart from the ‘do you really think boardroom meetings are like that’ comments I’ve read from Lib supporters I haven’t seen them explain exactly what is misleading.
Supposedly the Galaxy for tomorrow shows the ALP in front in QLD marginals 51/49. In my opinion this isn’t good for the ALP this early in the campaign. They’d be hoping and expecting much higher figures than that.
Adam,
On your list of the Shadow Cabinet:
Gillard was a partner at Slater and Gordon doing work almost exclusively for trade unions
Alan Griffin was an organiser with the ASU under Lindsay Tanner
Robert McClelland was a partner in a law firm, Turner Freeman doing work almost exclusively for trade unions
You should also add the proportion who had only worked for a union to those who had only worked as staffers for the purposes of a fair comparison.
On the same basis Joe Hockey is a hack (given he was a President of the Young Liberals) and shouldnt be counted as a lawyer.
Shows On
The other thing Howard said in the article was
“Love me or loathe me, people know what I believe in and where I stand.â€
That is a big part of the trouble, most people don’t know where he stands.
In 96 he stood for all of us, ministerial accountability a fairer Australia, no GST, but over the years this has morphed into core and not a a core promise, not a sackable offence and divisive statements on immigrants, education, gays and non-christians.
Recently we have seen changes on aborigines, climate change and working conditions.
Howard may have a better chance if Australia did know exactly where he stood and what he believes in.
Who really cares what politicians do before they become politicians. The fact is they are politicians, who could be argued to not be all that representative of Australians in any case.
The only people concerned about ‘union bosses’ are Liberal Party members. The Liberal Party need to think of the bigger picture.
Well, if 584 is right, then tomorrows Galaxy is bad news for the ALP. Or is it?? That represents a pretty big swing from the 2004 result (from a quick look at Poss’s site). I guess Lose the Election Please, that thats 2PP and not primary you are quoting??
No way, don’t give me a heart attack.
And in the interests of openess with all this talk about unions I should state that I have been a delegate for the PKIU and a member of the LHMU. But have also managed several businesses and ran my own.
Having seen and experienced 3 angles in the business sector the worst aspect about Work Choices is the total power given to one and the lack of rights and loss of dignity to the other.
ShowsOn
Thanks. Sounds inept.
LTEP 587
Who cares what people did before politics?
Because some life experience and preferably broad life experience may equip them to make a worthwhile contribution to politics. People who have all come from the same gene pool will tend to group think and having the same world view.
“Thommo, I’ll bite and ask what is particularly misleading about the union ads? Apart from the ‘do you really think boardroom meetings are like that’ comments I’ve read from Lib supporters I haven’t seen them explain exactly what is misleading.
Supposedly the Galaxy for tomorrow shows the ALP in front in QLD marginals 51/49. In my opinion this isn’t good for the ALP this early in the campaign. They’d be hoping and expecting much higher figures than that.”
The fact is that they lie about the implications of work choices. They have since day one. I agree with you that those Galaxy figures are less than encouraging for the ALP. But I never really thought the ALP would make too many gains in QLD.
Yes imacca. I’m just getting this off of comments on Possums blog. I have no inside information of my own.
I presume if there was any significantly good polling to come through for the Coalition it would’ve been leaked for the news tonight, to create the idea of forward momentum. However if the 51/49 is correct, it’s still not good enough for the ALP to win comfortably in my opinion.
Fagin @ 542
Thanks for that. Water.
Well, obviously water’s a huge issue, but just water for SA? Hmm, I guess that’s what the Senate’s all about, states’ rights, but it’s idiotic to look at the Murray-Darling Basin solely in terms of one state. It’s just a tad broader a problem than that….
It will be on the Courier Mail website at midnight EST (1 AM in Tasmania).
I am yet to be convinced by the Coalition or anyone else that Unions equals bad. At my workplace we had a union rep who was a lovely young thing, and sadly missed when she went on extended maternity leave. As well as union rep she was the one who always volunteered to organise the social functions, birthday morning teas, melbourne cup sweeps etc as well as the charity collections that arise over the course of the year. As well as being very nice, she was also well respected for her diligent approach to her work and her readiness to assist others.
Her replacement is a much quieter personality, but no less respected within the workplace.
Neither person would in any way be offside with the 60% or so of the workplace who are not union members.
I don’t believe that this situation would be unusual throughout the nations workplaces.
51/49 2PP in Qld for Galaxy is still good news for the ALP.
It represents a 8% 2PP swing. JWH needs to get it under 6% in QLD to have any chance of survival.
@577, BlueBottle
I asked a similar question a little while ago and was put on to this link
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/116
Explains all you need to know about the results of past debates.
I can’t believe the worm will be ditched, 90 minutes of spin-doctoring with no bullshit-o-meter to cut through it will make very tiresome TV. Will the FTA channels even bother to televise it?
Depends on which “marginals” they polled – if it was Bonner, Moreton, Blair & Herbert, I would agree. If Galaxy took the current swings into account when determining “marginals” and went for something more interesting like Ryan, Leichhardt, Bowman & Dickson, that would actually be quite good. Apparently, the boss of Galaxy said on Channel 7 news that the ALP could win up to ten seats in Queensland and that the Coalition had a 10% chance of winning the election – I doubt he would have said that if the polling was done on the former four seats I mentioned.
Arbie old son, the only thing John Howard stands for is John Howard.
He’ll be remembered as the bloke who, in times of relative prosperity and by dint of sheer ego-driven stupidity, led the Liberals to the worst annhilation in Australian Federal political history.
This is gonna make the 1996 Keating shellacking look like like penny-ante stuff. Howard and half his cabinet are gonna lose their seats along with the vast majority of his back bench.
And there’ll be many a dry eye in Sydney over it all, too.
Appearing as a lawyer for a union does not make one a “union boss” any more than appearing for Martin Bryant makes one a mass murderer. The expression “union boss”, at its broadest definition, must mean one who has held a responsible position in a union.
ESJ, I’m not particulalry convinced the Liberal Party are any more representative than the ALP. Plus strict party discipline means that individual opinions etc. don’t mean much. The party ultimately is dominated by the decisions of the Cabinet, and if you look at the Liberal Cabinet it’s not too inspiring. Personally, I don’t feel I’m represented by either party.
Thommo, you still haven’t explained exactly how they ‘lie about the implications of work choices’. What exactly do you mean? Also, if they are lying why has Hockey not come out and used his own figures to disprove the union ads? Why did Hockey admit that it had become ‘the norm for [conditions] to be traded off without adequate compensation? I’m still not convinced that unions have mislead when it comes to WorkChoices. Personally, I know more people who have been disadvantaged by it than advantaged, although I admit the majority aren’t effected at all and don’t even know what it is.
“I believe it was an explicit condition of the Liberals that there be no worm for the debate – I guess it wouldn’t look good for the worm to fall whenever Howard talked about himself!!!”
How would they enforce this? Any television station, could hire a panel of people place them in another room, give them the signalling devices and a screening of the debate – you have the worm. As long as the “worm” is shown after the debate, and not throughout, I don’t see how it influences things.
I should add that this Galaxy marginal polling in Queensland was reportedly done in four electorates (from Possum’s site).
Well a couple of months ago he predicted a trend back to Howard in an op ed in the Sunday News Ltd tabloids. The VERY next day his own Galaxy poll showed a swing to Labor, and a result of 57 / 43!
Supposedly the 4 electorates are:
Bonner, Moreton, Longman and Herbert
Yes all, bear in mind Latho only got 42.9% 2PP in QLD.
Is the galaxy just a marginal poll, or is it the normal national figure, with extra goodies?
And yes, the Liberal ads were good comedy. Make no mistake, the election is everything!
Union boss
Union lawyer
Union official
It all adds up to the same thing.
yup
someone with expertise in industrail matters and workplace issues
Gee Thommo that was convincing… I’m gonna vote for Johnny now.
Not.
EStJ @ 610;
You complete tosser. That has to be one of the most ridiculous statements i have seen on this otherwise reasonably good blog to date.
You say they are all the same thing?? What thing exactly??
The Liberal ads specifically say “union boss.” The word “boss” has a meaning – it means a person holding some kind of authority. A lawyer appearing for a union is not a “boss” of that union, is probably not even a member of that union. They are a person who has been hired for their professional services. Is Sharan Burrow’s hairdresser a “union boss” because s/he provides a professional service?
610
Union boss
Union lawyer
Union official
It all adds up to the same thing.
BOO BOO BOO
3?
Yeah. Union lawyers like bloody John Kerr.
610
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Union boss
Union lawyer
Union official
It all adds up to the same thing.
….
What might that thing be? A target for character assassination? Really, the coalition will have to do better. What matters is leadership, integrity, issues, policies and vitality. But since they lack all these pre-requisites for office, the coalition will try insult, abuse and invective.
Yup and they’re gonna be running the country soon in every government in the country
I can’t wait – Bloody Beauty
yeah
i know a union offical in the public libary system
talk about a brute
what he can do with bookmarks and book covering materials
well..cover books…., read to kiddies, promote learning
the man is a monster
Thats it of course! If Sharon Burrows hairdresser ever runs for parliament we now have a label for her and can characterize her exactly!! But wait, is she an employee or does she own the hairdressing business?? No matter, she can be a “brave small business owner” or “union boss” dpending on what party she runs for.
A 10% chance of victory huh? To get that out of a 51/49, they must have polling Maranoa, Moncrieff, Groom and Fadden
BOOOOOOOO!!!
Adam at 525
Not sure if this has been answered yet (bloody long string this…) but Griffin was with the Federated Clerks Union. Hope I got in first, but somebody has to buy the Sunday night pizzas at this place…
Maybe Julia Gillard’s boyfriend does Sharan Burrows’ hair.
“Teenage love child union boss hair link shock”!
So Thommo ( at 593) the Unions ‘lie about the implications of Workchoices’ do they?
You must have a short or failing memory about the Government’s adverts.
What about conditions which were ‘protected by law’ – the TV ads the Government ran to promote SerfChoices made this specific statement in bold red letters – and that was a blatant lie, designed to fool the very people who would be worst affected – low paid workers in the hospitality and service industries – those conditions could be traded off in an AWA for nothing – all they had to do was comply with five minimum conditions. That left huge swathes of award conditions up for grabs, like penalty rates, shift loadings, redundancy pay, overtime rates etc.
That’s why the Government had to bring in the ‘fairness’ test, to stop employers ripping conditions like penalty rates from workers without fair compensation – now we have people covered by 3 types of AWA’s – pre-Serf Choices, Serf-Choices and post-Serf Choices, a bureaucratic nightmare, impossible for small business to understand ( and plenty of non-specialist lawyers struggle with this too). And what about that other ‘elephant in the corner’ – Employer Greenfields Agreements – this abomination is just imposed on workers when new businesses are being set up. The ultimate lie, because it is not an ‘agreement’ – worker can just take it or leave it, just like an AWA.
There are many other anomalies in the Serf Choices legislation – it’s dog vomit and the Rodent deserves to have his face rubbed in it.
If he loses his seat that’ll just about be the equivalent of eating his own vomit. Oh if there is a God in Heaven, consign the evil Gollum to the depths forever!!
The big question is – with the election only a month before Christmas, will those mean and nasty, un-Australian union bosses call a beer strike?
I think Curtin was once a union official. Billy Hughes and Chifley too, I expect. Gough was a lawyer, but Hawke was a union boss among bosses. What is your point , ESJ? Unions are comprised of ordinary people. You think it improper for ordinary people to organise themselves, or to seek political office? Why would you think that? Are you not really a democrat at all? What then? Jealous? Afraid?
Where’s this 51/49 thing in Qld coming from ?
Union boss/lawyer/ official & party official hack
is the same thing, it shows the Labor party is one closed circle or class. The “new class”.
and if you want to try something different, how many of these union boss/lawyer/officials actually worked in the industry they claimed to represent?
Lomandra at 534
Nix (Nick Xenophon) has policies on pokies and water. Given that we both live in SA, I hope the latter policy is we should get some to drink (after NSW and Victoria have grown cotton and rice with it). Little else at this stage given he stood up three days ago. Some might suggest he has more idea than the cleavaged ALP candidate for Booby (sorry, Boothby) Nicole Cornes. I suggest he will be SA’s answer to Brian Harradine (less the religious twaddle). That’s what the States’ house is for isn’t it?
JustAlarmed – in this case you are both right – more or less – Lindsay Tanner was Vic State Sec of FCU, too, but in 1993 FCU amalgamated with unions covering the local govt sector and became the Australian Municipal Administrative Clerical and Services Union (ASU).
ESJ, you really should try a new tune. This is only going to make a devestating loss by the Libs all that more painful for you in 6 weeks time.
It was leaked to the comments section of Possum’s blog. See comment 40:
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2007/10/14/we%e2%80%99re-off/#comments
The results will appear officially on QLD’s Courier Mail website at midnight EST.
Edward, is it your argument that conversely the Liberal Party is ultra-representative of a broad range of the public?
Are you arguing that a person is merely a reflection of their job? Ever worked with people who are, surprisingly, very different to yourself? Have different opinions on things?
Someone’s past job (and this needs to be emphasised, it’s their past job as as soon as they’re elected they become politicians) is just not relevant to what they are as a person.
Even calling an organiser, an industrial officer or a superannuation officer a “boss ” is stretching things. The only Shadow Cabinet members who have actually held executive positions (eg, state secretary) in unions are Crean, M Ferguson, Bevis, Tanner, O’Brien, Evans and Sherry (7, or 23%)
I have reorganised the table to make this clearer.
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/backgrounds.shtml
So when Howie gets his a*se kicked on the 24th does that mean he gets one months notice to vacate Kirribilli? Can’t wait to see him and Hyacinth getting kicked out on Christmas Eve. Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!
Nick Xenophon definitely changes the mix for the SA senate, though I agree with other commentators here that have pointed out that it doesn’t necessarily (and probably won’t) improve Greens chances.
If the Libs really crash as badly as we all expect, then some preferences will wash Nick’s way. He won’t feature far down their list, I’d imagine. With a strong primary (anywhere around 10%) he should cobble together a decent quota, if he doesn’t score one outright. Could hurt FFPs chances, though.
Andrew Bartlett in QLD is pretty gone. Not only are Dems primaries down but he can be expected to get squeezed by preferences. Larissa Waters (GRN Lead senate candidate) was realistic about her chances on Friday but wished Andrew success if she didn’t. I don’t think this is going to ever happen. The Dems can’t shore up enough flow to raise that boat. The Greens are at a higher water mark, they won’t go before him.
I notice Andrew Bartlett in a little desperation in the OZ today calling the other candidates “Extreme” and “Fundamentalist”. I would have thought this was poor form given Larissa’s well-meaning comment on Friday. He is effectively calling her “extreme”. The ALP used the same tactic in mailouts to New Farm ahead of the Brisbane Central By-election on Saturday, calling the Greens “extreme”. It appears to be gathering traction.
Of course, Andrew is most worried about Jeff Buchanan. Greens and ONP are fringe Left and Right respectively but this can’t be said of Buchanan and FFP. He knows that Fielding has fulfilled since 2004 the role of Don Chipp of old and knows too well that the stalwart Meg Lees departed chiefly due to the shift Left of the Dems. If Rudd truly wants balance in the senate a centrist party is best to make sure the government works.
Fielding has been successful in 9/30 amendments since 2004 (30%). This is more than every other amendment from all members, with no other party achieving more than 1%.
He’d be worried about this.
Wonder if Ed StJohn is any relation to the Edward StJohn (pronounced Sin-John) who represented Warringah upon a time for the Liberals in the ’60’s?
He was an odd-one.
A toff with something of a conscience. A very rare beast indeed in the Libs. Ended-up resigning from the Liberal Party over the Government’s Voyager cover-up.
He’d have to be at least 110 years-old now.
From the sound of the union bashing thing, this is a different Eddy. (A toff, to be sure, but sans conscience.)
Still, if it’s the same one, please tell us how it felt to get up Harold Holt’s nose with your maiden speech Ed.
Edward’s “argument” just amounts to saying that 100% of the Labor Party front bench comes from the Labor Party. Well, hold the presses!What a revelation!
This doesn’t alter the fact that the oft-repeated Liberal statement that “70% of the Labor Party front bench are/were union bosses” is untrue, and since anyone can do the research I have just done, presumably they know it’s untrue.
630
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Union boss/lawyer/ official & party official hack
is the same thing, it shows the Labor party is one closed circle or class. The “new classâ€.
and if you want to try something different, how many of these union boss/lawyer/officials actually worked in the industry they claimed to represent?
…..
Hack? Closed class? How would you know, ESJ? People have a right to organise themselves and to strive for political power. This is the nature of democracy. Do you want to deprive people of these rights? Or are you content just to resort to empty slogans and slurs?
Freely run civil organisations – like unions – are a foundation of democracy. You should be proud that unionists can rise to great prominence in our society – it is a measure of the health of our political liberty.
All this banging on about unions is like trying to scare the kids with tales of ghosts and wicked witches.
There’s some weird atavism going on here: unions equal communism, be very afraid.
Since when did a modern Australian union profess fealty to China (or maybe Cuba?) now that the USSR has gone the way of the dinosaurs?
Come on, this is old class warrior claptrap from the dark ages, and it amuses me that it’s the conservatives that like to live in past. Unions have moved on, and largely are professional organisations with membership from across the spectrum of Australian society.
It’s a sure sign of utter desperation to be trying to paint the Labor party as some sort of stalking horse for the unions, especially given the relative numbers of union members versus potential voters for the party.
This nonsense should be exposed for what it is.
Dont worry about the wall-to-wall thing. State ALP governments will probably start to fall once Rudd’s elected. A couple anyway.
In the meantime, there always Lord Mayor Campbell Newman
As mentioned earlier, WA Govt Donation to Telethon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nh6zotlC0E&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fforum%2Eaustralian%2Dmedia%2Ecom%2Eau%2Findex%2Ephp%3Fshowtopic%3D601%26st%3D900
Further to Steve Fielding’s work in the Senate, we can examine votes in the senate. If we disregard procedural votes (on which both majors tend to agree) which are about 32% of votes currently and only count the times that Family First voted with one major party and against the other (that is, on votes of substance where the major parties disagreed) then Family First favoured the Opposition 175 times (30% of all votes) as opposed to the Coalition 119 times (20% of all votes).
Even more extraordinarily, Family First voted with the Greens on no fewer than 198 occasions, when both were voting in concert to oppose the Government, a significant 34% of the time. The natural antipathy between Family First and the Greens makes this revelation of more than passing interest.
Family First saw fit to oppose both major parties on 87 occasions, or 15% of the time.
This shows working balance in the senate and, as the sole senator, apparently Fielding is working his butt off! In fact, he leads the recent tally of votes he has managed to be present to hear and vote on at 75% (the next closest is champion Meg Lees on 69%, then Brian Harradine at 48% and fairly paltry at 40%, One Nation Senator, Len Harris).
This certainly shows him fulfilling his promise of looking at each proposal on merit and working with both sides of politics for outcomes.
I think this really appeals to Rudd, ever the pragmatist. It is really the best way to get legislation through without a DD..
Supposedly latest Newspoll will show ALP 56/44.
Adam at 641
Of course of the 12 (40%) Adam identifies as non-union
2 are hereditary peers
3 are former state or assistant state secretaries of the ALP
1 is a former union lawyer
2 are former staffers
Bottom Line: 87% hack factor amongst Labor shadow ministers.
Its called Labcest – where everyone comes from exactly the same background, mixes with exactly the same people and this exactly the same.
Hhahahhahahah leaks everywhere!
All these leaks are taking the fun out of it
No Edward, that doesn’t cut it. A lawyer is not a “union boss.” A staffer is not a “union boss.” A party official is not a “union boss.” The Liberal statement that “70% of the Labor Party front bench are/were union bosses†is simply untrue.
Edward @ 630
I had the honor to be a minor union boss in the 1980s. At the time, I was working, day in, day out, in the particular industry. At the coal face, so to speak. Your comments and lack of understanding of basic principles offend me, my wives, my former colleagues, their children. May I suggest raw sliced garlic on good bread or, failing that, Dr De Witt’s Liver Pills. You will feel better after a good purge.
Adam
You are being disengenuous about party backgrounds.
Your 43% includes those of the ALP front bench who were party officials (Swan, Smith) , staffers (Macklin and others). There are those also and the ALP are guiltier than the coaltion on this front (though the latter are not blameless) of the ‘family ties’- Crean,McClelland,Fitzgibbon, as well as those of the recent past Beazley, Hoare (not on the front bench). Children,siblings, spouses of other politicians have every right to run for office but the ALP in the last 10 – 15 years have taken it a bit far!
However,it mustbe said that the ALP are going into this election with a much broader gene pool than the recent past.
ALP 70% Union Bosses………..Libs 100% utter ba-stards”.
Apparently (didn’t see it) The Federal Govt has donated $500,000 to Telethon – I believe the Feds have donated to the Appeal.
Edward, the closest thing this country has to a hereditary peer is none other than your own Alexander Downer (or Dolly the Sheep, as Keating called him).
He’s third generation inbred parliamentary material.
Reckon you’d better check the pH in your own gene pool before saying Labor’s needs a bit of chlorination.
Derek,
Given your background, you would not qualify under the principles of Labcest.
EStJ
ESJ obviously has never been, nor ever fears being forced to become, an employee.
Current working Australia’s experience with unions would likely be exactly as described above – it’s the person who has more empathy for the many than most. (The building industry is a little more robust)
Hence the polls.
Sure I want to see JHW pay for the workchoices mess, but if pride is the only thing stopping the Liberal party from changing their tune to provide an electable alternative, well, then they’re going to pay.
They will be forced to change their tune eventually – what will ESJ’s position be then? (Freezing cold? Lacking cred?)
If Newspoll is 56/44 then that ruins the pattern – two 56s in a row!
I can’t see how Labor can pick up 10 seats in Qld if 4 marginals return 51/49. I wonder what they call marginal?
Blackburnpseph Says:
“You are being disengenuous about party backgrounds.”
I am not discussing party backgrounds. I am discussing the Liberal claim that “70% of the Labor Party front bench are former union bosses,” which I have proved to be untrue. Unless you can challenge me on that question, butt out.
Blackburnpseph, it still doesn’t change the fact that party officials and ‘hereditary peers’ are not union bosses. You can’t include them in the 70% union bosses figure. An industrial lawyer that represents union clients is also not a ‘union boss’.
We’re arguing semantics here though… Adam’s point seems to be the Liberal Party are being deliberately misleading by quoting a 70% figure for ‘union bosses’ on the ALP front bench. Edward appears to be making an argument that it doesn’t matter whether they are or are not union bosses, they are still unrepresentative.
Two completely different strains of argument with both people not really answering each others points.
648
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
Bottom Line: 87% hack factor
….
ESJ, we can see you are a coalition hack-in-the-making and your hack-envy is showing. Why don’t you take up golf or tennis or boating instead. These pursuits would be much more rewarding than moaning about the supposed failings of your supposed opponents.
Canberra Boy at 632:
Absolutely, BUT… all of Griffin’s union officialdom was pre-amalgamation. So we are all right…
The libs have actually killed off the union bogie with IR reform, not just work choices but removal of secondary boycotts, etc.
The union bogie worked well when we had ’strikes’ – remember them. No trains for weeks, queuing for petrol, blackouts,no beer at Xmas. It just doesn’t happen any more.
Frankly, the major union assault on the public consciousness these days is the horror of Sharan Burrow’s hair! The libs have pulled the rug out from under themselves.
Evan at 640. The original ESJ died some time back (’94?). Our Edward has confessed he is not that ghost.
Speaking of which…
“Edward StJohn Says:
51/49 2PP in Qld for Galaxy is still good news for the ALP.
It represents a 8% 2PP swing. JWH needs to get it under 6% in QLD to have any chance of survival.”
Thank you Edward! I’ve been trying to catch up with this thread, got to the the Galaxy stuff, and waited for someone to state the obvious. Wonderful that it was your good self!
The highest ever TPP Labor vote in Queensland is 50.7%. If 51/49 is uniform the ALP will pick up seven seats in QLD. I think they’ll be happy with that.
Unless the dreaded Narrowing kicks in.
I now intend transmitting this finding to the media and we’ll see if any of these lazy hacks will run it now that I’ve done their homework for them.
The 51/49 result is not state-wide. It’s restricted to 4 marginals, Bonner, Moreton, Longman and Herbert. What we can abstract from it, I don’t know. However, it certainly doesn’t look like an 8% swing, more like a 5% swing.
Blackburnpseph is absolutely correct. Nepotism is a disease afflicting both parties only Labor more so.
BO – no more pyschoanalysis? “Hack-envy”. Fortunately for me as ominod alluded to on a personal level it is irrelevant who wins the election and probably (for reasons I wont go into) a Labor win would be preferable.
I support reform in our system of politics not the current deceittful system. Surely you can see much of this is formulaic on Labor’s part? Very little substance. But I have stated this view before so I wont repeat myself.
Hey, Hey! Back from Tasting Australia and follow on. ALP ribbons in my hair. Recommend the WA truffles! Travelled on the new tram line, inaugral journey, for fun and memories.
What election?
There have been a couple of comments which ask when the election will be ‘declared’ and whether Hyacinth will have her wish of one more Christmas at Kirribilli…
Postal votes can be received up to 13 days after election day, so results are not formally ‘declared’ by the relevant Returning Officer for a House of Representatives seat before then. Counting of Senate votes takes much longer given the larger ballot papers and more complicated preference distributions.
However, the ultimate result of most national elections in recent history has usually been apparent on election night. In these circumstances, the losing Prime Minister advises the Governor-General within a few days of the election result that he/she is resigning and that the Governor-General should commission the Opposition Leader to form a government. The date on which this occurs may be partly dictated by the readiness of the Opposition to form a government. In 1972 the election was held on 2 December and Gough Whitlam famously had himself and Lance Barnard sworn in as a two-person Government on 5 December in order to implement a range of reforms immediately. When Labor won the 5 March 1983 election, the Hawke Government was sworn in on 11 March, after it became clear who was going to be in the Caucus and a Ministry was elected. The last change of government was on 11 March 1996, nine days after the election on 2 March.
The incoming Prime Minister usually allows the vanquished one a period of grace to move out of official residences. It looks extremely unlikely that Hyacinth will be at Kirribilli this Christmas.
Out of curiousity, I’ve just checked the occupations of Liberal and Labor leaders since WW2. I hope I haven’t missed any – I went from memory. But here’s how they line up…
LIBS: Menzies (lawyer), Holt (lawyer), Gorton (farmer/air force pilot), McMahon (lawyer), Fraser (farmer), Snedden (lawyer), Howard (lawyer), Peacock (lawyer), Hewson (economist/political staffer), Downer (diplomat), Howard again (lawyer).
LABOR: Curtin (union official/journalist), Chifley (train driver/union official), Evatt (lawyer), Calwell (public service clerk), Whitlam (lawyer), Hayden (policeman), Hawke (union official), Keating (public service clerk/union staffer), Beazley (university lecturer), Latham (political staffer), Beazley again (university lecturer), Rudd (diplomat/public servant).
What does it prove? Buggerall, except that the number of occupations politicians are drawn from these days is very limited.
Nine of the 21 leaders have been lawyers, only four worked for unions. You could also argue the case for Bob Hawke being a lawyer (as well as union leader), as he was an industrial advocate.
So for the vast majority of the time since World War 2, Australia has been led by lawyers. The defence rests, Your Honour.
And if you want to add the really short-term PMs…well, John McEwen was another farmer.
And hats off to Frank Forde…he was only PM for a week, but he’d worked as a teacher, railway clerk and electrical engineer before entering parliament. We need more like him…
The Labor 2PV in those four seats in 2004 was 45.9%, so a 51% 2PV represents a swing of 5.1%, which if uniform across Qld would mean only 2 Labor gains (Bonner and Moreton).
But how does that fit with the Newspoll suggesting 56 / 44?
Maybe this election will be won or lost in Victoria and NSW. If there are 6% swings in those two states, but only 4% or 5% in all other states and territories Labor still gets around 80 seats.
I know this is another off-topic question, but I hope some of the experts can answer this one. Is the AEC genuinely neutral? After looking at all the election sites with seat-by-seat descriptions, I was struck by teh anomaly between NT (3 seats) and ACT (2 seats). How does such a distribution get made? Who sets the rules? It looks like a cynical exercise to deny Labor a likely extra seat (3rd in ACT). Any coments? Am I missing something?
Parliament sets the rules, not the AEC.
socrates, the number of seats is determined by population. The ACT did have 3 seats for a short period of time, however the population dipped below the required amount and one seat was then removed. Nothing sinister at all. I believe the 3rd ACT seat was a Liberal seat in any case.
671
Antonio
You forgot Simon Crean.
ESJ = Troll masquerading as a real Tory. All that is asked of you is to back up your broad sweeping generalizations with some facts.
Oxford Dictionary definition of facts: “information used as evidence or as part of a report”.
ie explain how people who have provided a service for a union (ie a legal firm) are union hacks or union bosses, or even union lawyers…
Adam’s question is valid, and you have not answered it. Get serious.
I’d find that to be underwhelming, but if we look at the pendulum, those are the only two Queensland seats in the first sixteen. Herbert is #24, while Longman is #28. It’s feasible the ALP could get bigger gains elsewhere (especially with the figures NSW and Victoria have been giving). It’s also feasible that there are bigger swings in other Queensland seats.
Regarding Nick Xenophon in the SA senate contest.
Does any body know if he has a registered party? If not, will people be forced to vote below the line in order to place a vote for Nick Xenophon, a la Pauline Hanson in QLD in 2004?
If Xenophon does not find himself above the line, this could seriously harm his chances, due to a likely increase in informal votes, and people finding the process to arduous.
I’m not from SA, but am interested in the contest. If any one out there knows or could comment, it would be welcome.
I have 8% because I have taken the statewide 2PP vote from last time which was 42.9% Adam has taken the 2PP for the 4 seats which were polled.
Between 6-8% there are a considerable number of seats in QLD, provided Labor keeps above 6% swing 2PP in QLD it wins or alternatively must get higher than 5% in Vic or NSW to win.
In the Newspoll for July –Sept Labor had a 9% 2PP swing so arguably its vote may have declined 1 point or it may not be statistically significant. Either way they still have at least a 2% buffer before JWH is even in the hunt.
in grey the libs have lost the battle of the polls
in a major regional town no liberal posters were to be seen , all the best polls had a labor poster on it
is this an example of the lib’s not having enough members to do the job and is it a reflection across the nation, if so the liberals are in trouble
noticed chris pyne,s election poster has nothing on it to suggest he is representing the liberal party, it just say’s chris pyne sturt
Sky News now reporting the proposed debate next Sunday moderated by Speers is a goer. In the Great Hall with a panel of journos asking questions for 90 minutes.
No word on whether the worm has been turned.
Socrates,there are two seats in the NT. The probleam has been that the quota has been fluctuating very closely in the area where the second seat has / has not been required 1.48 – 1.52. It was politically convenient for both sides to legislate for the second seat as it went 1/1.
Territory seat numbers are based on voters rather than population.Adam is that correct?
JustAlarmed
I think I have stated my position on unions and the ALP a number of times. Broadly my views are the same as 653 BBpseph.
I dont see the point of repeating them or arguing statistics. For Example KR has stated both Bill Shorten and Greg Combet will be on his front bench – does that increase or decrease percentages, I dont care. The general point is clear – if you dont agree then so be it.
There are only two seats in NT, Solomon and Lingiari, and two in A.C.T., Canberra and Fraser.
Before the 2001 election there was only one seat in N.T. There are about 100,000 enrolled voters in the N.T., that’s a bit too much for one seat.
674
socrates
Where did you get 3 seats from? The NT has 2 Reps seats, and 2 Senate seats.
“671
Antonio
You forgot Simon Crean.”
Not a hard thing to do!
It’s offical, Canberra did do a donation. Mind you it was trounced by the State govt donation
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,22586211-2761,00.html
Matt Price
October 14, 2007 12:00am
DURING this excruciatingly protracted election year, John Howard has done to national politics – and his once formidable brand – what the boffins who added cherry flavouring to Coca-Cola in the mid-1980s did for the famous soft drink: it was an expensive, infamous marketing disaster.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22581056-5000117,00.html
Many excited messages on my phone machine. They cannot wait!
Who’s “they”?
What are they waiting for Crikey?
another 3 years of a Howard government i’m sure.
Socrates, the NT has only two House Of Reps electorates, as does the ACT. The ACT had three electorates between 1996 and 1998. The basis on which entitlement to representation is calculated and redistributions of boundaries conducted is outlined on the AEC website here.
Edward the fact is that your side of politics has been telling a big fat lie, which the media have been too lazy or gullible to ping you on. Since you can’t refute my proof that it’s a lie you dodge and obfuscate as you always do, but it’s all just bluster and isn’t fooling anyone.
3 economic tests or measures which cannot be justified on equity grounds:
1. 30% private health insurance rebate
2. 50% discount in capital gains tax
3. tax free super
all of these measures favour wealth and higher income earners. Anyone think Labor would abolish any of these 3?
Edward, I don’t know, but I’d certainly abolish the 30% private health insurance rebate. People are being sold a big con on that one.
Evan @ #656 says
Evan,
I believe there is an even better example of hereditary peerage on the
conservative side of the political fence. Fortunately this one was defeated in 2004!
Take a look at the family tree:
Maternal Great-Grandfather – Arthur Budd – MLA for Byron (1927-1944)
Maternal Grandfather – Sir Harry Budd – NSW MLC (1934 – 1978)
Paternal Grandfather – Hubert Lawrence Anthony – MP Richmond (1937-1957)
Father – John Douglas Anthony – MP Richmond (1957-1984)
Son – Lawrence James Anthony – MP Richmond (1996 – 2004)
668
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
Blackburnpseph is absolutely correct. Nepotism is a disease afflicting both parties only Labor more so.
…
The main trouble with the parties is that no-one will join them any more. The active membership is tiny in almost every case. This is a problem for democracy. At least the ALP can recruit new candidates from the ranks of unionists. But where does the Liberal party turn to for new blood? Consider the appalling weakness of the Liberal parliamentiary parties in the various states: they are just dismal by any measure.
I don’t think nepotism is the main reason: the public just don’t “join-in” these days as they once did: sporting, social, industrial and political associations are in decline everywhere. This is a very big problem for our political culture.
From this standpoint, the parliaments of the land have a lot to thank unions for: they have recruited, trained, supported, tutored and drilled countless new candidates for the mostly thankless demands of political competition. It does not make any sense to me to vilify people for wanting to be active in this way. No-one is saying unions are perfect, but union bashing is just senseless sloganeering: it is not a serious way to win office.
Edward StJohn, for a short while you were actually posting comments that were relevant and containing logical, sensible points that added some substance to the general theme of the thread.
This absolute inane garbage that you are spruking throughout this thread demeans you as a, I thought, a reasonably perceptive and intelligent person.
It also is demeaning to the cause that you are attempting, extremely poorly, to support. If the general supporting arguments of your fellow travellers is put forward at the same juvenile level that you are subjecting us to, which on available evidence, they are, then god help your cause, because you people surely aren’t.
I can see this initial upbeat dirging into the slow drag. Many days to go, as Howard wants. So, I will expect weary hearts. And in the last week or so? I will be joyful!
Edward
I would add no capital gains tax on the primary home to that list as well.
And any subsidies to public transport as the higher income suburbs usually have access to public transport whilst many lower income suburbs don’t (on this point I am being provocative).
ShowsOn and others, sorry my mistake; I see there are only two seats in each. I suppose it is just that ACT is very close to the cutoff for 3 seats. Anyway, thanks for explaining that there is a quota system to make it impartial. Sorry AEC!
Though I don’t see that it follows that another seat there would be likely to be a Liberal seat. If Labor has a strong vote there it coudl pick up all three.
OMG – Antonio, I thought you were joking at #625 when you said
Now I see that the Tele has a story which starts
I really am starting to question her judgement – first Michael O’Connor, then Craig Emerson, and now a hair products salesman with a love child…
661 LTEP – summed up the difference well I thought.
696 Adam – Yes I agree 70% union officials is not right. It should be 60% union officials and 87% hack factor (unions + staffers) instead.
700 – BO – 15% of the workforce are in unions as compared to a 60% representation (according to Adam’s stats). Yes there are good and competent union officials but one side being made up of them substantially or in a majority? V.few if any of these people have actually worked in the industry they claim to represent
I agree to both parties are unrepresentative – only Labor more so. Explain what the condition of hack envy is?
702 Scorpio – So I can improve what posts were good?
For the long term observers, I think I have said my bit on this topic, unions/ALP/nepotism so I dont intend to respond to any more posts about this topic if thats OK?
BBP 703- CGT on family home I agree. totally unjustified. If I have a $40 million mansion in Peppermint Grove I pay no CGT. Not fair at all and encourages unproductive use of resources.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/files/newspoll-15-oct.jpg
668 Edward StJohn Says: October 14th, 2007 at 11:25 pm
I’m sorry… did someone mention Dick Honan?
# 707 Edward StJohn Says: October 15th, 2007 at 12:05 am
Its interesting that you bring up ‘productivity’. Tell me, what is the long-term trend in productivity under the howard government?
ShowsOn at 692
Who’s “they�
‘they’ are the weary ALP cynics, having painted themselves as that, suddenly invigorated! Delightful!
And in WA there is Sir Charles and Richard Court.
Richard of course inherited his Father’s Nedland Seat when Sir Charles retired, and subsequently also became Premier.
If Howard gets his way out of this then he will go down as the greatest Australian politician ever.
Menzies doesn’t count, he had no effective opposition because it had split in half.
Blindoptimist, I can only speak from my own experience but I wouldn’t entirely blame the public. When I was at university (in the 80s) I was not impressed by either Young Labor or Young Liberal. They were not interested in student issues and were far from representative of their peers. Their main aim seemed to be launching their own political careers, preferably after as little contact with the normal workforce as possible. Yet in my state these were precisely the people who went on to make up the office holders of both sides.
Years later I became a member of one of the major parties for some years and I found the experience quite disillusioning. The sole purpose of rank and file members seemed to be fundraising and manning election booths. There was minimal intent on the part of party leaders to meaningfully engage with the members. I suspect that even by then they were more interested in what focus groups told them. Preselections were tightly controlled by the executives for anything that resembled a marginal seat. I was interested in economic policy and once tried to attend some meetings of a policy committee. I couldn’t even find out where they met, let alone be allowed to attend!
Thanks James J. Treading water. Watch them spin the rise of Rudd’s disapproval rating.
Thanks James (#708) – Newspoll says 56 to 44 unchanged, with ‘better PM’ showing Rudd 48 Howard 39 (both up one).
The Galaxy marginal seat poll in QLD is up:
“Rudd in trouble at home”
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22585516-952,00.html
The Liberals have to drive up Rudd’s negatives, +36 is just massive. Slowly trending down but nowhere near enough. The negative air war will be interesting.
I’m not sure how much to make of this. It is a poll of 800 voters across 4 seats:
“The poll, of 800 residents in the marginal, Liberal-held seats of Bonner (0.5 per cent), Herbert (6.2), Longman (6.7) and Moreton (2.8), found Labor on track to pick up just two of these seats”
Of course, if Howard does win this, demonstrating his greatness as a politician, maybe he should reconsider handing over teh leadership. After all, how could you ask him to stand down when he has pulled off the miracle? Surely he shouldn’t be held to handover the lodge to Costello as a core promise.
Re: Newspoll:
Despite millions of dollars in taxpayers money spent on Liberal party Govt ads, the polls have’nt moved or narrowed, Jeanette and John I know a good removalist.
706
Edward StJohn Says:
{702 Scorpio – So I can improve what posts were good?}
After that effort, none. I’m cured pal. It probably won’t bother you at all but I shall make it a point of skipping every post of yours from now on and every post responding to your rants.
I give every poster the courtesy of reading their posts and getting an idea of their points of view, but am quite happy to make an exception in your case.
Nothing up on the Courier Mail web site yet. Probably saving it for the printed version.
Just saw the Liberal Ad – it’s a direct Rip off of the 96 Keating “Leadership Ad”
I think we are going to see a reverse 96 Campaign
From the Galaxy Qld article:
Come on, a couple more details than that little tease please.
Apparently the Galaxy poll is directing Family First preferences to the Coalition. I’m not sure under what premise they can do this.
There being two new threads open, I’m closing this one.