Time for a new thread. For the want of anything better to hang it off, I hereby reprint my piece in Crikey last week on prospects for the Senate. This does not mean discussion on this thread need be relevant to this topic.
Like so much else this year, speculation about the Senate election has been guided by “the narrowing”: that mystical force that would drive swinging voters to the Coalition once the campaign focused minds on economic management. It’s now clear to all but a dwindling band of die-hards that this hasn’t happened and isn’t about to.
It is thus necessary to revise the view that the Coalition will be strong enough in the Senate to make life difficult for an incoming Rudd Government. The Liberals and Nationals instead find themselves in danger of losing a swag of seats, which opens up a dizzying range of possibilities for the Greens.
A case in point is Kerry Nettle’s bid for re-election in New South Wales. Earlier in the year it seemed safe to assume there would be a traditional three-all split between left and right, with Nettle fighting a probably losing battle with Labor’s number three, Senator Ursula Stephens. In that context, any improvement in the Labor vote would have been damaging for Nettle. Now it seems Labor might be strong enough to win Stephens a seat without excluding Nettle, perhaps even bequeathing her a measurable surplus as preferences. That would boost Nettle’s chances of overtaking and defeating the Coalition’s third candidate, Senator Marise Payne.
The story is similar in Victoria, given that Labor and the Democrats have thought better of repeating their 2004 preference exchanges with Family First (who nonetheless have a vague chance if they can match their vote at the state election).
There has been a further stroke of good fortune for the Greens with the entry of independent Nick Xenophon in South Australia. Such is Xenophon’s popularity that he looks likely not only to win a quota in his own right, but also to deliver the Greens a substantial surplus. This could help their candidate Sarah Hanson-Young overcome the third Labor candidate, Cathy Perry.
Bob Brown should have no trouble winning a seat in Tasmania, the question being how the remaining five seats will divide between Labor and Liberal. There is familiar talk that Brown might do well enough to also carry running mate Andrew Wilkie over the line, but this at least seems a little too optimistic.
The two states where Labor’s strength does not help the Greens are Western Australia and Queensland. Western Australia does not look likely to produce the huge swing required to cost the Liberals a third seat, so a strong hike in the Labor vote has the potential to squeeze out the Greens. Nonetheless, their candidate Scott Ludlam remains the firm favourite.
Labor is also becoming hopeful of winning a third seat in Queensland, which it has never done before at a six-seat half-Senate election. On the other side of the ledger, there is a chance that the Coalition will lose the seat of Nationals Senator Ron Boswell to Family First, who will harness the entire right-of-centre vote if they get ahead of Pauline Hanson. It’s hard to see how Hanson herself could put a quota together, despite all that has been written about her minor successes in preference negotiations.
The remaining wild card is the Australian Capital Territory, where Greens candidate Kerrie Tucker threatens an historic win at the expense of Liberal incumbent Gary Humphries. This would be especially significant because territory Senators’ terms are tied to the House of Representatives, so that an end to the Coalition’s absolute majority would take effect immediately.
While it is likely that not all of these potential Greens wins will come off, they will probably have around five Senators joining the two continuing from the 2004 election, to be joined on the cross benches by Nick Xenophon and continuing Family First Senator Steve Fielding. The Coalition will be reduced from its current majority of 39 seats out of 76 to around 35, while Labor should increase its current 28 seats by four.
1,322 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 19 20 [21] 22 23 … 27 » Show All
MM @ 995,
That’s not very white of you.
I love (in the platonic sense) most gay men – usually very witty and lots of flair and elan, but why are so many lesbians so deadly serious and self righteous all the time?
No 992
No Diogenes, you don’t have to take an all-or-nothing approach. When it comes to the issue of bringing children into the world, only a man and a woman can naturally arrive at that outcome.
Circumventing that process through IVF, adoption or what not is inappropriate.
im not sure about that ESJ, in my experience most women are bi.
So why is it the government’s business when consenting adults want to marry each other?
You’re such a nanny stater, trying to run other people’s lives.
The Finnigans 912.
Nice work by Annabel and it begat a great opus. Now if only she could do a similar story on JWH which would beget?
Be nice to Generic Pierson, you’d be edgy if you had to talk to yourself all day because you couldn’t get a decent debate going on your own site.
Talking about lesbianism:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22794534-12377,00.html
Totally irrelevant (as is much of this discussion), but it’s something…
Have I chanced upon a blog about sexual orientation?
1002 @ – you mean in the same way the white heterosexual middle class managerial men are serious and self righteous all the time?
Does that mean all single parents should have their children taken from them?
You don’t seem to realise that most people who use IVF are heterosexuals.
I hope you’ve got your candidacy sorted out Mark
You might not be on Andrew Robb’s Christmas Card list.
1003 Generic Person Says: November 20th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
What does that have to do with raising a child?
Why are we discussing homosexuality on a psephological board?
Getting back on topic:
Movement for Labor in QLD:
Flynn
NATS 1.55
ALP 2.32
Herbert
ALP 1.53
LIBS 2.35
Longman
LIBS 1.54
ALP 2.35
Petrie
LIBS 1.80
ALP 1.95
Ryan
LIBS 1.44
ALP 2.62
1003 GP-why is conception ie creating life, different from saving lives?
Glen 958 says
“Generic Person 916 totally agree with your position on homosexuality”
Let’s keep the smut out of this blog, and don’t try to introduce it by the back door.
No 1005
I would temper my marriage views by saying that civil unions would be fine in the alternative.
GP @ 1003
“No Diogenes, you don’t have to take an all-or-nothing approach. When it comes to the issue of bringing children into the world, only a man and a woman can naturally arrive at that outcome.
Circumventing that process through IVF, adoption or what not is inappropriate.”
Adoption is now circumventing natural processes to bring children into the world?
What happens if they don’t get adopted, GP? Do they just remain in stasis indefinitely?
just put it under the broad theme of politics HH.
887
John Hunt Is A Coward Says:
November 20th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Insightful Barnaby quotes tonight:
The only poll that counts, is the the election.
No one will live forever, not me, not you, not anyone.
WOW!
sounds as though Barnaby J had a bit of a “Carl Rackerman cricket commentry esque” thing going on tonight – (might rain…….. might not)
ESJ while you indulge us in your Alby Mangels fetish can you tell us what that got to do with election 07? And some how I get the vibe that your a single lonely man…am I right?
By-line on Sky news… “Newhouse in strife”.
“The Liberal Party has foreshadowed a possible legal challenge if Labor’s Goerge Newhouse wins the marginal Sydney seat of Wentworth, after Liberal frontbencher Andrew Robb received legal advice that Mr Newhouse’s candidacy is invalid.”
Yeah. Strife. Sky news editors at their very best.
Howard Hater, how much have these seats moved since a day ago?
Why are we talking about homosexuality? Is this still about the TT interview yesterday? Or has Kevin come out, or something?
I’m sure there are plenty of other sites devoted to discussions about sexual morality, and the politics of reproduction.
Is GP an auto-cephalo-proctologist (a man who is paid to stick his head up his own arse)? Anybody that rants about sexuality as if it is axiomatic with biology is presumably avoiding the elephant in the corner, i.e. their own gender orientation. Biology, apart from the tool kit, has nothing to do with it, you are a most likely a repressed homosexual if you are ventilating these thoughts in public. Hit the room of mirrors, admit the Tories are stuffed and find a like-gendered partner. Then you’ll find ‘serenity now’.
# 1019 Generic Person Says: November 20th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
I didn’t realise we all had to ask for your permission for anything.
William, we need a new thread…
El Nino Says:
November 20th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
1002 @ – you mean in the same way the white heterosexual middle class managerial men are serious and self righteous all the time?
No El Nino, I’d say lesbians are entitled to their own category of serious and self righteous.
“1002
Edward StJohn Says:
November 20th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
I love (in the platonic sense) most gay men – usually very witty and lots of flair and elan, but why are so many lesbians so deadly serious and self righteous all the time?”
What next Eddie? “Some of my best friends are Jews”?
That’s what ALL marriages should be. Government’s have no write charging money just so consenting adults can marry.
It should be a private contract between consenting adults, the government should have nothing to do with it.
Geez GP, it’s obvious that as with Dame Edna, homosexuality leaves a nasty taste in your mouth.
Guys the thing about marriage is its a church tradition that is being given the force of law, and we are supposed to be a secular society.
So either:
a) The government disavows marriage and so any social group or church or gay pub can marry someone..
or..
b) The government makes marriage secular and non discriminatory.
There is no other option beyond these two that is rational and ethical.
No 1008
Excuse me, Pi, but it was nath who asked me for my view. If you don’t like it, I’m not going to try to change your mind.
And for the record, I am not religious at all. I believe the bible is a load of rubbish.
#947 – i sorta understand – i’ve thought for a while that until very recently, infertility was natures way of terminating your breeding success line. i do, however, feel dreadfully sorry for those whose genetics do not support their desires/embedded proclivities
ah, aussieguru01 continues his fetish in trying to ascertain the identity of ESJ.
1006 CT
well the good news is you can vote for Fundies First who (in)famously declared that lesbians should be burnt at the stake. And good thing too by all accounts from some of our most informed bloggers.
This discussion is both hilarious, and a frightful waste of Williams bandwidth.
You can’t talk people out of their prejudices – let’s just leave these insecure tossers to themselves.
What about WA – why ISN’T the swing on to the same extent?
It’s probably the lesbians you hang around.
Use smaller implement.
Ahem, enough silliness about that. Barnaby on Lateline was a bit much. I do like the surreal turn this campaign has taken – it makes it just a tad more interesting than it should be.l
To be fair to Generic Person, his views on this board are consistent with a very conservative person, more than likely from the english home counties.
I liked the Barney comment: ‘I’d like to live forever, but I won’t. You wont live forever, your viewers wont live forever’.
The man is a genius. I think it is tactically quite a defensive move to be having Barney on at this stage of the game. Are they particularly worried about Qld? He seemed to be mentioning Qld State govt a lot.
Man this thread has become more gay than last night’s today tonight interview.
Can we get back on topic plz!
DGW 921.
Don’t worry about ACT senate. Humphries is on his way out.
Last poll (can’t remember what it was) had ALP / LIB / Greens 48/25/20 which gives Kerrie the number two spot easily. Humphries needs at least 30 primary because the rest of the ticket is against him.
GetUp has done wonderfully for us here in the ACT.
This is insane (not just this thread) – Centrebet has more volatility in its betting odds than Betfair. In fact, whilst Betfair currently has Labor at $1.26, there is over $70000 worth of unmatched bets on Labor at $1.27. Meanwhile, there’s only about $300 on the Coalition at $4.70.
onimod its hard to tell what is and isn’t a waste of william’s bandwith because he hasn’t actually said what he wants his blogs to be about (well beyond australian politics) and thats a lot of things.
Glen,
Get over yourself please.. Kerry may have slight bias to Labor… I will give you that… but he is one of a very few on our side… I bet the bloggers here could name 100 journos that have anywhere between slight to blatant bias towards the coalition. eg every f**ker on Sky, almost every f**ker at GG… and the undisputed champions of the ‘I Love Liberals Club’ – Those knobs at The West.
Dyno – the politics of sex is the key to the sex of politics. Make of that what you will.
ESJ @ 1030 – having worked for both, I don’t understand the difference in the categories. Please enlighten me.
No 1040
What’s your point? People are entitled to different views.
If we could turn attention back to the election for a mo, what chance does the independent Brunning have in Forrest?
And, for my final betting update for tonight:
BENNELONG:
RODENT 1.60
MAXINE 2.20
Stop! Stop! Stop!
Speaking to these dills.
Consider William’s width.
Unless I see anything useful, in the next 10 mins, I won’t be back till midnight.
Pages: « 1 … 19 20 [21] 22 23 … 27 » Show All