Statsmeister extraordinaire Geoff Lambert has sent through an exhaustive statistical analysis of recent polling trends, and concluded that the number of seats won by Labor will have a nine in front of it. Read all about it here. In other prediction news, I have contributed an assessment of the state of play in the Senate to Crikey. For those who can’t or won’t read this, a quick summary. I think it most likely that New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania will go three Labor, two Liberal and one Greens, Western Australia will reverse those numbers for Labor and Liberal, and South Australia will go two Labor, two Liberal, one Greens and one Nick Xenophon. Queensland is a tricky one, but if I had to put my money somewhere it would be on three Labor and three Coalition – though neither the Greens nor Family First can be written off. I will also go out on the same limb as Malcolm Mackerras and tip Kerrie Tucker of the Greens to defeat Liberals Senator Gary Humphries in the ACT. That points to a huge result of six Senate seats for the Greens. The Coalition will be down from 39 seats to 34, Labor will be up from 28 to 32, and the Greens will double their numbers from four seats to eight, with Nick Xenophon and Steve Fielding joining them on the cross-benches. I must sadly concur with the consensus that this election will mark the end of the Australian Democrats.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Educated guesswork
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Sophie Black.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
1,009 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 21 » Show All
Has anyone heard about a Newspoll tomorrow? I have.
Thaddeus, I would like to address your points:
1. Spending on poor – what do you think the computer access (mostly for lower-end schools, since the ‘better’ schools already have it) will do? Or for that matter the extra dental clinics and free dental visits? Or then there’s the ALP tax package, which very deliberately does NOT return the tax cuts to the rich (unlike the Nationals’ coalition partners), and instead invests this into improving healthcare – again, a policy from which the poor will benefit more than the rich.
2. Fiscal responsibility – if Rudd took any other tack, the media would crucify him like they did Mark Latham. Or have you forgotten the “L for Latham” campaign mounted in 2004?
“Better to be a successful compromiser than a powerless idealist” – Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand, knows as “The Prince of Diplomats”.
3. Free Higher Education – As a student on HECS, I actually approve of the idea. If you don’t pay for something, you don’t appreciate it. This has, in the past, resulted in “lifetime students” – students who never intend to work, but take course after course, all at the taxpayer’s expense.
4. Public Housing – talk to the States, not the Commonwealth. Outside their area of responsibility.
5. Pensioners – My grandparents are angrier at the way Howard is treating them (with shameless bribery, most of which will be revoked if he wins as “non-core promises”) than at the way Labor is failing to match Howard dollar for dollar. In case you didn’t get it, that is Howard’s strategy – force Labor to match him to win the election, then watch as they can’t pay up – like Howard would be unable to if he won. Howard is past the stage of trying to win the election. Heis trying to do two things – firstly, limit the damage, and secondly, poison the well for his successor.
Your signal that you intend to vote Nat as a result of insufficient ALP welfare policies, when the Nationals have sold-out their core constituency many times over, is a sure sign that your are a) rusted-on Nats voter, b) a troll and c) lying about intention to vote Green – no Nats supporter ever votes Green in the other house. When you are prepared to examine yourself and your words, your contributions will be welcome. Until then, I wish that I could block you from my computer screen (not from PB – all have a right to be here, even trolls – I just don’t want to read your posts).
Good day.
alpal.. don’t you dare… that’s not fair!!!!
alpal, so tell me, what do you know? (thick Russian accent)
Thaddeus: OK, I’ll bite. Get off your progressive high horse, and look what is at stake. What good is Labor if it is always in opposition? Your plan to vote informal does nothing but other than leave Howard and Co in power even longer. The general electorate is conservative and is generally opposed to change. If Rudd was doing another Latham trick, you can be sure that the ALP would be in opposition for at least another decade.
Sorry but your rant doesn’t hold much weight, and if Howard gets back in I’m come back here and thank you so much.
Let me guess… the newspoll was taken after the Coalition launch but mostly before the Labor launch. I wonder what way the result will be skewed.
Give, alpal.
You Englander schweinhund! You vill talk! Talk!
335 Thaddeus, like the rest I don’t get you. You are a progressive voter and want to vote National? If you vote Greens in the Senate and National in the Lower House, you’re basically cancelling one another. You want to punish Labor but not the Libs?!
I guess voters will have to decide on “the money or the box”, I hope that voters have finally come to the conclusion that we can’t build a better society unless we all kick in.
The bribes in from past elections have largely been pissed up against the wall, one year I spent the Family tax benefit on a plasma, another year on a trip to the snow – great fun but hardly nation building stuff. My self funded retiree inlaws are rolling in grey pork but I think they’ll take the money because they ‘deserve it’, I think there’s something about that demographic that causes them to grasp and hang onto every single dollar they can get there hands on.
Will 355 – “The general electorate is conservative and is generally opposed to change. ”
There you have it in a nutshell, Labor has swallowed hook line and sinker conservative propaganda. People will vote for a strong progressive alternative.
Why is Labor not promising a Royal Commission into the many,many scandals of the Liberal party? Children overboard, Tampa, Waterfront, AWB etc etc
Why is Labor not advocating real welfare reform? Rebates for school expenses, how about increasing welfare payments for those who do not have money!!!!
Whoa Centerbets gone nuts
ALP $1.31
Non ALP $3.50
Yes, I’m still trying to figure out how the Greens will be able to force reform on the House of Reps from the Senate. I now don’t think Thaddeus is a troll, just somebody who is extremely clueless about the legislative process.
Yes, some very good press coverage of Labor’s launch. Much more than I expected. Even the Herald Sun here in Melbourne is referring to Kevin as the “frugal” opposition leader:
“FRUGAL federal Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has gambled on economic caution to win office and pledged he will make Australia the smartest nation in the world.”
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22760784-661,00.html
Thaddeus is Glen posted under another name!
Antony Green is getting absolutely rave reviews on Jon Faine radio (774 Melbourne). The callers and the media panellist (Deb?) all great fans.
My guess (104) wasn’t completely a stab in the dark. I pinged Anthony’s calculators all of the way to max excepting QLD and subtracted 1 for Boothby (based upon all that I’ve heard, I thought Cornes might not make it at the time) and that was how I got 104
arbie j @322 – yes there will be a ‘cleanout’ of LNP members, and the party will ‘reform’ but most likely in the image of the Clarkists in NSW ie right religious zealotry. How far that goes will depend partly on which members remain after the carnage, although it is the organisation in which they have control. That should keep the LNP out for a few terms.
Thad, you are quite rightly critiquing some of the outrageous actions of this coalition government. Yet, as you say, your going to vote for them. It makes no sense. Vote green 1, and preference Labor if you want the back of this govt, and want to deny the ALP the $2.something from the AEC for your vote. Voting green in both houses, while preferencing Labor is a strong enough message.
I just want to see real progressive policies implemented in this country!!!!
Thaddeus
If you are a “progressive” green supporter then I take it you are in favour of cutting all the rural subsidies to farms that are unviable and taking precious water resources out of dry river systems? LOL
Alpal
I almost don’t care. After seeing Possum’s link to the statistical analysis of poll reliability, it is too late now. The polling average now is around 55/45 2PP and on Possum’s past analysis it might drift by maybe 0.1% per week. If it shows a coalition bounce after the Liberal launch, the Monday polls from Newspoll and the next Neilsen will surely show a bounce to Rudd after the Labor launch. Unless the Labor campaign bus crashes into a child care centre in the next 7 days Rudd will win.
A newspoll tomorrow would make sense, as that would then set the scene for one a week later on the eve of the election.
KT #362,
The only way that the Senate can do that is by being obstructionist, thus giving Rudd the excuse he needs to call a double-dissolution election.
Socrates, sure we need to end a lot of environmentally unsound practices in this country including intensive “farming” and forest destruction as well as ending coal.
Thaddeus
You are right to point out these things – Labor is the 2nd party of the Right, but given the dominant ideology and the current stage in history, it will take many years for Labor to move to the centre again – and wow, if they ever be centre/left… like I think neoliberalism has to die and we are at the pointy end of this ideologynow – its like a bell curve, so at this stage, some change is better than nothing….
Thaddeus …
Your push for the Labor party to become more progressive is welcome, but then again it is hardly surprising. The support base of a political party is always divided, I think, between ideologues on one side and political pragmatists on the other.
Policy, progressive or otherwise, means nothing if you’re not in power.
That said, I’ll be voting Green in the Upper House and Labor in the HoR.
If News polled to be out tomorrow, will it include any reaction to Rudd’s launch, or is only part of the sample caught by it? It may well make a difference.
Alpal – come on mate, give us a clue. Good news for ALP or bad?
Jaundice
A clean out of the libs would take away power from the Clarkes and the Hawkes who are a big part of the extreme religous right controlling the libs.
They get a lot of their power from sitting members who give them coveted staff positions, wipe out the sitting members and you wipe out a big part of their power base.
This gives the progressive libs a chance to reform and attract back into the party quality people.
Thaddeus
This is precisely the ultra leftist codswallop that 95% of Australians abhor about the Greens. Why is that Thaddeus, because the viewpoint of Brown and the mob are completely irrational and irrelevant to todays society?
Free Education? For crying out loud…The education system is buckling under the pressure of not enough resources and money and you want to implode the sector from within? Where are the teachers for the influx of kids into the university sector to come from? How would all those graduates with honours feel when the paper the degree is written on is worth more than the award itself?
Progressive Tax system? How does that go again? One that increases the percentages of tax payable by those who are wealthier? In other words, the taxation system that taxes the rich progressively more than the poor? Sounds an awful lot like what we have..
The main problem with you Greenies is that you believe that you should not have to earn anything, but rather have it handed to you.
The major parties both believe in arming those who wish to work harder for better healthcare, education and employment opportunities. They believe that Australians need a safety net when they fall on hard times, but, most importantly, help those who are willing to help the nation grow and prosper. They just go about it different ways.
Where does the Green way of thinking enter in? Nowhere in the above. Just hold your hands out and demand better for nothing – because you feel you are owed.
The Greens balance of power in the Senate will NOT see more progressive laws be introduced and tabled, all it will do is balance the laws between the Lab/Lib ways of thought.
In that regard, the Greens job has been done in the past by the Democrats, One Nation and Independents. What has been the major differences? Nothing…Brown would have done a Lees in the end.
The minor parties are a buffer between left and right which moves policy toward the centre and always will be. It would be the same if FF was in control. In that regard the major policies the minors believe in are increasingly irrelevant.
Thaddeus
you’re going to get an an awful bashing in here unless:
A – you’re ideologically fixed enough to ignore logic, and have too much pride for self examination, or
B – you’re trolling (good luck if you think that’s pushing humanity forward…)
If you’re really concerned about the lack of progressive politics, I’ve got another viewpoint for you. (By the way – go and get a copy of Future Shock, Alvin Toffler)
We have had 12 years of stagnant politics in Australia. If you want change (and I think generally here most agree with you) then that is a very different culture to where we are now. A culture of change can exist, so long as the generally conservative population doesn’t fear the ramifications of it. This could be seen as the motivation behind this ALP campaign – it’s pragmatism.
You have to realise that no change of government will further cement the conservative, anti-change, population of Australia, because 3 more years of the current regime won’t be the end of the world, and it’ll just further reinforce the idea that there’s no need for change in a large chunk of the electorate.
So – my challenge is this: Vote for change now, vote for change in 3 years, and so on.
If you do anything to maintain the status-quo you are, as has already been pointed out, shooting your own foot of.
Thaddeus
I’m sure that a number of other bloggers here would like to see more progressive policies for the Labor camp – many have expressed this before. However a party that ran on these lines would scare middle Australia and never be voted in, NEVER. Democracy means that (for better or worse) you have to cater to the majority if you want to govern. What is the point of taking the progressive moral high ground and remaining in opposition for ever?
While I understand your frustrations, I can’t help but think that the simplistic idealism you have expressed here is more than a little naive.
348 Scaper,
If you pan down on the PB main page, William has a thread about the QLD Senate ticket posted on 13 November, 2 days ago. I reckon that you ought to be able to get most of what you need there. Failing that, check the AEC website for the Senate preferences for the QLD parties. That will tell you who is preferencing who. Between those two, you ought to be all set.
But will they Thaddeus ? The Coalition has been in power for 11 years. There has to be a reason.I personally think that Australia has moved further to the right under JWH.
That may still happen. I believe we will find out many nasty things the Govt has done. There was a report on Lateline this week that showed up to 200 people may have been illegally detained by the Immigration Department, I’m sure when elected this will be examined.
But they have. There are tax cuts, and they are increasing payments to pensioners. They will never get elected on welfare spending alone. If you are not well off then look at the policies of the people for the last 11 years who have put you in that position.
I agree with most of the people here. If you want welfare reforms then vote for the Greens in both houses.
Julie #381,
Does that really make a difference (the Senate voting part)?
Doesn’t the work of Lambert and others make you realise how vacuous the MSM is on these subjects? All power to the real experts – particularly when their predictions are palatable! The dustbin of history awaits for Howard and his gang. And as someone predicted a while ago, they are starting to turn on each other. Barnaby is only the first …
alpal
We have a large black car with tinted windows … several large gentlemen are on standby … they are not happy … just one word from me … if you get my drift … the boys also have a gunship, fully primed … so speak … (a word to the wise. My boys are not for toying with, especially on a Thursday …)
All the best for your future …
Poor Thaddeus seems to have stumbled into a nest of well informed pragmatists.
I just ran 55.3% TPP through one of the calculators and apart from 94 Labor seats an interesting discussion point is that the Torries will only have 22 safe seats (<5% margin).
I imagine there’ll be by elections aplenty when the long serving occupants of those seats take a look at ground zero on Nov 25, perhaps Lord Downer will make the supreme sacrifice for Turnbull to re-enter the fray, he’s probably their only hope in opposition.
Suggestion for a new and mischievous thread, ’senior liberals in safe seats who have a parachute in their rucksacks’.
I am communicating what a lot of people up here feel.
It looks like Janelle Saffin will pay the price for the conservative sell-out!!!!
I doubt there’s a newspoll out tomorrow – at least not one that includes fresh polling. There should be an ACNielsen and (of course) Morgan
Thaddeus, Get used to voting informal for the rest of your life – or do the honest thing and pay the fine i.e. don’t vote at all. You are asking for something that this Nation will not deliver again in your lifetime. Australia is now a very conservative sociey and it isn’t going to make a significant move to the old left anytime soon.
Thaddeus: Latham was a ‘progressive alternative’, and look what that did to the ALP. So no, a progressive alternative will not win this election. The point is that you must get in to power first. Howard did the exact same thing in 96 by shadowing Keating.
You talk about welfare, have you heard of the middle-class welfare, and as of Monday the upper-class welfare that we’ve had for the last 11 years? You just can’t promise to tear it up while in opposition. This is the same reason Howard had to ‘accept’ Medicare, but over 11 years he has made it a former shadow of itself. The dog whistle you should be listening to is the ‘razor gang’ once Labor gets in, as this will be the start of the removal of some of the middle-class welfare that exists due to Howard and it will start with means testing everything.
Thaddeus, you must be a troll.
There have been many sensible suggestions posted by people covering your concerns.
Your response.
I don’t like conservative policies, so I will vote back in a conservative government.
People, don’t waste your time.
392 – it’s not as contradictory as it sounds. People are entitled to different views.
In NSW politics I think there is merit in voting out the current government so that at least the opposition will be a bit progressive, and there will be a progressive voice, rather than the current right wing mash
arbie jay @ 377 – Hawke will certainly win his seat though, and will be rabidly trying to eliminate moderates along with his fellow goat-throaters. I think it could be an ugly ongoing street fight in the LNP after the conflagration. But, am I worried? – more fun to watch for the next few terms.
Can Adam or one of the other pseph experts help me please. I heard on Tv that the Libs felt if they could narrow to a 52-48 TPP loss they could still retain power by holding enough marginals, presumably because of the national pork shortage in safe seats. Is there any possibility they are correct?
393 Michael
sorry – I’m not quite understanding – can you please explain in a little more detail?
Thaddeus, after reading countless comments in many blogs, I’ve come to this conclusion. Anyone who says I’m now not going to vote for Rudd because he said this or did this or didn’t do this, were not going to vote for Rudd anyway, no matter what. So those in Page who think like you do, weren’t really interested in change for the better and deep down are National/Liberal supporters.
383,
It depends
….. the parties will put their best or main candidate first on the ticket SO if that party gets enough votes to get a member in, it will be the first person. My logic is for parties that I don’t like, I am voting them in reverse so that if on the OFF chance they do get a member into the Senate, it won’t be from my vote (as my first vote for that party would have been their last person). Using the Libs as an example this year in NSW. Coonan is first on the Libs ticket. Btw,the Libs and Nationals are running a joint ticket in NSW too so you have to be really careful and READ if you are putting the Nationals in a different place from the Libs – which I am. Libs are going dead last on my ticket and the Nationals some degree of seperation from them. Anyways, I am assuming Coonan will get in but it won’t be off of my vote .
Basis logic here is to screw the parties you don’t like and help those you do (by voting for them in the same order as the party wants them in [how they are listed on the ticket])
So Ms Whippy is now defending the same teachers she accussed a couple of months ago and being cadres of Chairman Mao? No wonder the masses are suss of politicians.
Thaddeus, the Greens can start commenting on internal policies when they are elected into seats in their own right by the constituents they represent. Doesn’t matter – either upper or lower house – not at the behest of every other candidates preference flows
Pages: « 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 21 » Show All