The standout finding of a very interesting post-election Newspoll survey of 1125 voters is a question on preferred Liberal leader: 34 per cent responded for Turnbull, just 18 per cent for Nelson and 14 per cent for Julie Bishop, with the optimistic Tony Abbott on 9 per cent. Rudd predictably is streets ahead of Brendan Nelson as preferred prime minister, leading 61 per cent to 14 per cent (91 per cent to 1 per cent among Labor voters).
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Newspoll: Turnbull 34, Nelson 18
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
1,259 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 22 … 26 » Show All
FG – Apart from Truss, who’s likely to be in the gun about AWB, Horatio seems to have sidelined anyone who’s a potential source of embarrassment if there are further inquiries into the various scandals. Only other exception is himself with the silly aircraft decision.
Frustrating that the AEC web site hasn’t been updated for several key seats since just after midday, while a huge number of foregone conclusions have been updated more recently.
@ 815 Chris B sez:
Aktion T4
I just checked the Senate votes, and it looks as if Pauline H has just managed to get the numbers required for public funding. Just when I was hoping we’d never hear of her again!
I just watched a replay of Tim Gartrell’s press club speech. He was asked about the Libs should have dealt with the Howard and Costello changeover and he made mention of the way Labour did it in the UK.
He made specific mention of this ad for those interested in such things.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iovmJQZTQpk
Yes Jenny, the AEC still are calling 8 seats doubtful, although we know most of them have been claimed by either party – Herbert, Dickson, Swan, Solomon, Flynn.
Bowman and McEwen would seem to be the only uncertain ones left.
Yes, it was McEwen I was looking at, but they haven’t updated there since just after lunchtime. Still, even if Bailey gets back in, I suspect she’ll be cannon fodder once more comes out about the regional rorts.
Flynn, Solomon, Robertson to Labor
Dickson, Herbert, Swan to Liberals
Bowman and McEwan to close to call.
So the AEC doesn’t consider Calare and O’Connor doubtful?
Why are we concerned with informal voters, they are so stupid they would have voted Liberal anyway, god bless ‘em I say.
Looks as though McEwen has Fugly Fran leading by a mere 82 votes, ask not for whom the bell tolls…………
With informal votes – there are people who deliberately vote this way. An acceptable consequence of compusory voting.
#953
Jenny Says:
December 6th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
Jenny – what are rules concerning the cut-off for public funding?
How many more elections do we give the National Party before it finally disappears up its own alimentary canal. What a rabble of tired irrelevant seat warmers they are, a totally useless blight on the body politic.
958
Phil Robins @ 958 – in O’Connor, the AEC seems to be assuming that all the Nats’ preferences will flow to Tuckey, and in Calare they’re assuming that all the Independent’s preferences will go to Cobb. Both Tuckey and Cobb are a fair way short of an absolute majority, though.
Davidoff @ 953 – here’s the relevant provision: ‘If in a Commonwealth election a candidate or group has secured at least 4 per cent of the first preference vote in the division or State or Territory they contested, they become eligible for public funding.’ So Hanson gets back on the public tit, dammit. Only did it by a whisker, though.
The rules are in the parliamentary handbook on the Parliamentary Library site at http://www.aph.gov.au/library/handbook/elections/index.htm
#
956
Jenny Says:
December 6th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Yes, it was McEwen I was looking at, but they haven’t updated there since just after lunchtime. Still, even if Bailey gets back in, I suspect she’ll be cannon fodder once more comes out about the regional rorts.
Yes Jenny, she along with a few others. And then we can turn our loving thoughts to Dolly on AWB, Andrews on Haneef and I am sure we can implicate Ruddock (the ghost who walks) in something.
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.
Basil F @ 963 – agree entirely about the Nats. Being in opposition everywhere will really test them, because their only real raison d’etre is the distribution of public largesse. A few people earlier on this blog were talking about the consequences of this election for the Liberal Party, but I reckon it’s that Nats who are most in danger. There was an emphatic move against them in North Queensland, which is about their strongest regional support base, and also in the sea-changing areas of coastal NSW. They’ve also been left with a series of marginal seats, which they are likely to lose next time around.
Oops – gotta go and walk the dog …
Albert Ross, that is a most offensive comment. About what I’d expect from you.
Its all over in Flynn: called for the ALP.
What a shocking loss for the Nats. Going the way of the Dems shortly.
I agree Adam. It is way out of line.
Disgusting.
Jenny #951 ‘Apart from Truss, who’s likely to be in the gun about AWB, Horatio seems to have sidelined anyone who’s a potential source of embarrassment if there are further inquiries into the various scandals. Only other exception is himself with the silly aircraft decision’.
Except for Turnball and his $10M rainmaking technology donation????
Breaking news: Damien Hale claims victory for Labor in Solomon.
Ron says
where did you get the 1000 from collingwoodlegend ??
on aec site 94.70% counted leaving 4719 votes left ??
There are about 500 absentee, 400 prepoll, 200 postal and a quantity of provisional votes. This is from the AEC website.
Beats me why/how you can make a prediction that the ALP will lose by between 25 and 32.
Lefty E: yes, the Nationals really should have won Flynn. However, Chris Trevor will be a good MP, I suspect – a well established solicitor from Gladstone.
970
Except for Turnbull and his connection to HIH.
Except for all those implicated in the Regional Rorts matter.
Question to the forum: are the modern day Libs going the way of the United Australia Party?
No.
El Nino @ 975
No, the UAP chose to go down with dignity and style.
Its disappointing to see that there will be no Shadow Minister for Superannuation.
I was at a small luncheon today where Nick Sherry spoke (his very first engagement on his first day as the new Minister for Superannuation)
At that lunch he advised that his view is there will be no increase to the superannaution guarantee from its current level of 9% of total salary
He spoke without the benefit of notes and talked freely relying only on his extensive and compentent experience of superannuation.
It is a great credit to the new government that they have not only created the first ministy devoted to superannuation, but also appointed a minister who is evidently across all the issues
Adam @ 976 – perhaps not nationally (yet) but the idea whets the appetite in Queensland.
It’s very easy to exaggerate the difficulties that parties are in when they have just lost an election. I remember the prophecies of doom for Labor after 1996, and also for the Liberals after 1993 (I recommend Chris Puplick’s “Is the Party Over?” on this.) The Libs will flounder for a while, perhaps a long while, but they’ll be back eventually.
975 No
In 1940 The UAP got 30% of the Primary.
In 1943 it fell to a mere 16%
I can’t see the Libs ever getting that small an amount of votes.
For the Libs to fold someone would need to create a new party – and I can’t see the divisions being that bad yet.
981 – or for WA to be hit by a meteor.
So far I have made a profit of $59 betting on the election. Doubt Herbert will increase that. Sportingbet have paid out on Flynn.
Yes Mr Squiggle, Nick Sherry is indeed an extremely good choice for Minister for Superannuation (and… is it Corporate Governance or Corporate Law?).
I’m actually shocked at how poor the choices were for the Shadow front bench… I mean… Bronwyn Bishop? Really? I also don’t understand why the Senate Ministers weren’t chosen more wisely to at least face-off some of the Ministers in the same chamber. Also, why did they not keep some of the people in the same portfolios to ensure they were really across the detail.
Probably the only smart idea was completely dropping Kevin Andrews.
The decision to wind up the UAP and create the Liberal Party was really an exercise in PR by Menzies. He wanted to create a new image for the non-Labor side, and also a party over which he could rule without challenge. He succeeded in both objectives. The difference now is that there is no-one of Menzies’s stature.
If you are talking the ‘31 -’44 version there could be a possibility if the economy goes down the gurgler and the libs self destruct.
I believe the opportunity can present itself.
Also in 1943 the UAP had Billy Hughes as leader!
So onless the Libs elect Alexander Downer as leader before the next eleciton, I think we can be sure that they’ll still be around.
err 971…….. posted earlier today
868
NOT SO MAD MAX Says:
December 6th, 2007 at 1:02 pm
SOLOMON IS OVER. HALE by 186 . ALP now hold both HoR seats.
On the PB Solomon post site are the final details of the count.
BOOSHKA, Tough contest went to a really good bloke.
“For the Libs to fold someone would need to create a new party – and I can’t see the divisions being that bad yet.”
Its bad enough in Queensland and almost bad enough in NSW. I depends on how deep the ideological vacuum gets…
LTEP – I agree on the Senate v Reps aspect. I guess there will be a lot of questions “to the Minister representing the Minister for…”
Also, am shocked that Brandis got his dream portfolio of AG after supporting Turnbull – perhaps Nelson is hoping appeasement will work.
Leadership will be the key, but it is lacking at the moment.
I just had a look at Beazley’s first shadow ministry of 1996. The following members survived 11 years in Opposition to serve in the Rudd ministry: Faulkner, Sherry, Crean, McMullan, M Ferguson, Kerr, Tanner, Macklin, Smith, L Ferguson. Quite a few actually. The following did not survive: Beazley, G Evans, Lee, Lawrence, Collins, Brereton, Cook, Bolkus, Bevis, Schacht, Martin, O’Keefe, Latham, Melham, M Evans, Neal.
Sherry has been in the same portfolio the whole time (apart from the period 1997-2001 after his breakdown), so he ought to be across it.
Hahahahaha…….a morbidly obese person appointed shadow health minister
El Nino – true, but I would see the split being more akin to the DLP than to the UAP
Re the Libs,
It appears that the small business moderates are moving to take back their party. This follows local criticisms of Costello/Kroger by Judith Troeth.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/kennett-stirs-up-krogers-ambition/2007/12/05/1196812829403.html
Max, how can these be final figures for Solomon? The cutoff for postals is tomorrow.
Grog (a rose by any other name would smell as sweet) @ 994 – the DLP split was driven by a combination of ideology and religion. This potential split will be driven by personality. In such circumstances the UAP split is more appealing as an analogy.
There was no split in the UAP. It was just moribund, and was wound up.
Only a handful Adam.
Hale is on our news claiming and Tolner’s team are taking down the office signs already. Check out the PB Solomon site for todays totals.
Darwin is a redneck free zone for 3 years at least.
A DLP type split probably would be more likely under a Turnbull leadership. (though still unlikely – is there a real hot burning issue like in the 50s with Communism?)
Given the LIieral Party is based purely on the premise of keeping the ALP out of office, I can’t see an ideology being as much of a factor – though I guess if Alex Hawke can get preselected anything’s possible.
Pages: « 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 22 … 26 » Show All