Comments on: Galaxy: 52-48 to Labor in Queensland

By: steve

steve — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:36:04 +0000

Its a pity the Brisbane Times don’t get Nielson or Essential Media to do a regular poll in Queensland . News Ltd, Newspoll and Galaxy need some competition to keep them honest.

By: steve

steve — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 07:54:22 +0000

That Tasmanian Poll looks interesting alright, Stringa. It is a sharp improvement on the last one. They seem to be far more regular down there than what we get in Queensland.

By: grooski

grooski — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 06:41:39 +0000

Take this poll with a grain of salt. The Libs/Nats Noncoalition has recycled another leader. Borg is actually a nice bloke, and this is giving him a nice bounce, but still hasn’t got a team behind him. This is what cost him previously.

Give it two more polls and we’ll see the real state of play. Bligh is just as popular as Beattie ever was.

By: stringa

stringa — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 03:20:24 +0000

Some Tassie numbers if anyone is interested

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23912310-5013945,00.html

By: aj

aj — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 01:52:22 +0000

Peter Martin puts us onto this valuable tool. Look up your representative in parliament or any other.

http://www.openaustralia.org/

Looked up Peter Costello and here is a bit of trivia.

Has spoken in 30 debates in the last year — above average amongst MPs.
People have made 0 comments on this MP’s speeches — well above average amongst MPs.
This MP’s speeches are understandable to an average 16–17 year old, going by the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score.
1 person is tracking whenever this MP speaks — email me whenever Peter Costello speaks.
Has used three-word alliterative phrases (e.g. “she sells seashells”) 237 times in debates — well above average amongst MPs. (Why is this here?)

By: steve

steve — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:53:38 +0000

Meanwhile Queensland Education Minister is considering retiring at the next election.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/welford-to-consider-retirement/2008/06/23/1214073114854.html

By: ruawake

ruawake — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 07:14:26 +0000

News Ltd have their own pollster Newspoll (we own them). So the CM would have commissioned this poll and probably provided a list of questions to be asked.

Before the last election Galaxy did a similar thing asking the qualitative questions first. Some were unkind and called this push-polling at the time.

I will give Galaxy the benefit of the doubt – they had to operate within the funding they recieved. They had to ask certain questions to fulfill the needs of their client.

Its a shame that their methodology leaves their findings open to doubt.

By: bryce

bryce — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:49:08 +0000

Galaxy poll questions (Federal) asked just about everything – except voting intention!
Don’t want the CM to have to explain to the punters the huge incongruity which would have emerged. Do we hate Labor or not? Ooh, it’d be so confusing for them.

By: Kina

Kina — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:27:54 +0000

Clinton Porteous

Wasn’t he the guy writing that Rudd could be a one term govt, despite the record run in the polls since he was made leader of the ALP?

Will we hear in 10 years time – ‘honeymoon over’ for Rudd.

These guys are also in genuine denial. The honeymoon word is used because they can’t bring themselves to accept that Labor’s victory was genuine and not some sort of luck.

What we get now is everytime everything is not perfect it will be some sort of marker of the begining of the end.

By: Doug

Doug — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:17:36 +0000

Ruawake 44
Thinking about it the way you have the sequence of questions, the poll would not be indicative of either State or Fed. People would have some anger at Fed while answering the petrol question but then this would affect their voting preference for the State. So therefore it is not indicative of the State ballot.

But if Fed voting preference questions followed the Fed qualitative questions then a lot of people would not be angry enough to switch votes. And so the poll is not indicative of Fed voting intentions either.

But then again shouldn’t the voting preference questions precede the qualitative questions and not the other way around? So the poll was not correct procedure no matter which way you look at it?

Then the only reason this poll was taken was for propaganda!

Anyway, LNP are a rabble in both State and Fed.!