Roy Morgan has released a mid-week phone survey of 574 respondents on attitudes to the party leaders, which has 55 per cent favouring Kevin Rudd against 30 per cent for Malcolm Turnbull. Kevin Rudd has a 55 per cent approval rating and 31 per cent disapproval; Malcolm Turnbull’s figures are 43 per cent and 24 per cent. The sample produced a two-party result of 57-43 in favour of Labor: no further detail on voting intention is provided.
UPDATE: Aristotle in comments points out that primary vote figures from the survey are available on Morgan’s poll trends page: Labor 46.5 per cent, Coalition 34.5 per cent, Greens 8 per cent, others 4.5 per cent.
451 Comments
A great losss… Tim Dunlop hanging up his blogging shoes… http://blogs.news.com.au/news/blogocracy/index.php/news/comments/week_end_talkback/
Lucky you, WB: you’re just about “it” now!
So Rudd has a net approval rating of 25 and Turnbull of 19 yet the Morgan headline is.
Seems like little change except Turnbull is seen as more acceptable as an Opposition leader than Nelson which would surprise nobody.
The headline:
“Majority of electors prefer Mr Rudd as Prime Minister – however a concern must be:
More Australian electors “disapprove” of Rudd than Turnbull! ”
So the low disapproval rating has nothing to do with the fact that may voters (33%) haven’t made a decision about Turnbull, while only a few (14%) are still uncertain about Rudd. Difference of 19% in undecided outstrips the 9% disapproval by a country mile.
I wonder how long they spent scratching their heads to worry up that ‘positive’ bit of spin.
It’s just the usual Morgan BS to try and garner ‘attention’ for his polls
Out of interest William, what were the PPM figures for Howard/Beazley in 1996/1997?
Those examples of OOs writings are truly disgraceful. They are getting more blatant than Fox News. Now we have Fox OO but with less credibility.
I wonder who hands down the riding instructions for murdoch papers? If it is rupe or he just makes sure to employ the right sycophants to get the desired outcomes.
Yes Turnbull would be very affraid of Gillard. Even that old hand Howard was freaked out in parliament by Gillard, he couldn’t look at her. She seems to be able to stare you down and keep her chain of thought and speech nice and fluent – disconcerting.
The worry would be if Turnbull HADN’T got a small spike. I thought 83% apporval of Rudd among Labor voters was pretty impressive.Never saw a figure like that for Howard among Liberal voters.
Incidentally, Morgan was the same demographic genius who told me on the phone last October that the election would be “50/50″. It seems like the old rules of thumb in determining voter allegience no nonger apply.
No 6
TP, all the confected outrage over Shanahan is just silly. I bet if Shanahan was blatantly pro-Rudd, you’d have a different opinion.
No 7
BB, the margin in many ALP-held seats gained at the last election are retained by very slim margins. It wouldn’t take much for them to be lost.
so according to Morgan Labor is up 1&1/2 pts since Turnbull took over? surely not good news for The Merchant.
GP, just as many Liberal seats are held by very slim margins. It wouldn’t take much for them to be lost.
Primary votes http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/Trends.cfm
ALP 46.5 L/NP 38.5 GR 8
9 – and a very small shift to Labor would see their majority blossom out. The Libs have quite a few seats that are low lying fruit so to speak. Of course the old argument used by some for Barnett’s chances next election in WA (ie a further swing to him) could very well apply to Rudd, afterall it did happen to many state Labor governments didn’t it.
If an election was held today the Libs would loose more seats…how good is that!!!
If a journalist or a paper was blatantly Labor I would agree with and acknowledge anybody who complained about it. In fact it would be just good if no bias was shown by anybody in the media – but failing that a we require a wide diversity of media ownership as a way to balance a variety of partisan views, but we dont have it. And when it becomes as extreme as it is now then it is beyond the pale.
Would anyone care to lay odds on a DD in 2009? Two weeks of Otto Abetz wasting everyone’s time in the Senate the chances must have increased considerably.
The people coming back to the Libs for Talcum were only ever going to be the progressive leaning economic right. But his first stunt was to criticise Rudd for going to the US to talk about the finanncial meltdown etc, which was never going to play out well with that group of voters.
I think Talcum short-circuited his own bounce!
Wonder what Fielding would think of a DD.
Will Fran Bailey and Peter Lindsay(to name two) recontest their seats in 2010?
And surely Labor’s vote in WA will improve next time, allowing Rudd to recover seats like Swan and Cowan?
On the downside, I wouldn’t be too hopeful of Labor holding Robertson, Flynn and Solomon next time.
No 15
Of course, the irony of your argument TP is that Rupert Murdoch publicly commended Rudd’s ability to PM before the 2007 election. It isn’t a question of ownership.
Fielding last week looked like a man who was way out his depth and knew it. I think he would welcome an early exit from politics.
The two biggest blights on the Australian media are Shamaham and Milne!
I don’t see why either Flynn or Solomon should be at particular risk. I agree Robertson will hard to defend.
The Australian is a Liberal newspaper. You know this, and yet you go on buying it, and you go on (and on and on) complaining about it. If you don’t like Liberal newspapers, DON’T BUY THEM.
Flynn just seems to me an unlikely Labor seat, but you could be right, it depends on how good the Labor MP is working for his constituents!
Labor seems to have a crop of good new MPs in QLD, particularly those in Dawson, Forde and Blair.
Not to lay odds directly BUT I think that if it is being seriously considered behind the scenes, that they will wait until the fallout from the NZ, CA and the USA elections and see how things shake out, especially in Washington, before they jump in the deep end. If the Democrats get into the White House that will encourage Rudd to get a move on. Don’t know what the Kiwis will do but if Helen Clark can hold on, that will only add to the positives for doing it. In the meanwhile, say the next 9 months or so, they will have ample time to try to attempt to pass other pieces of legislation and see what the Senate does with them. I think IF they call a DD election, it won’t be until late in autumn or early winter after the variables I’ve mentioned settle down a bit.
No 23
And good riddance to Ms “Don’t you know who I am”.
GP: I doubt she’ll get preselection next time!
At least they do know who she is. I doubt anyone knew who Jim Lloyd was.
Damian only just got over the line in Solomon. I haven’t seen him personally out and about up here but he should be taking the opportunity when he is back here to do lots of door knocking and increase his profile. There is growing anti-Labor sentiment here though that might not translate to the Federal level. Also there is a bit of a moving population here. He could just as easily lose at the next election as win it.
No 29
The question is whether Mr Lloyd desired notoriety gained through abusing his role as a MP.
Realistically it will probably come down to the economy. If we don’t go into recession (while the rest of the world almost certainly does) and interest rates keep coming down then Rudd will increase his margin for sure. If we do, then it will be interesting and the extent of his achievements at the end of the term will be important (ETS, removing WC, education & health spending etc).
I wasn’t being entirely serious. I expect she will be deselected. It’s Labor’s most marginal seat and whether a new candidate can hold it will depend on the overall situation.
GP do you have evidence that Ms Neale abused her role as an MP? The C-DPP and NSW-DPP could not find any.
Dario @ 32 I agree with your ‘realism’. It is all about the economy. I favour Mr. Rudd to get a second term but I am less sure about that than I was at the beginning of this year. Let’s hope he is up to the job; the wellbeing of many may depend on it.
Labor would certainly have little to lose in the Senate from a double dissolution election. The trick is to get a trigger that is sufficient to gaining public support. The MLS bill certainly could be such a trigger. However, I suspect the Medicare Thresholds (No. 2) bill will be passed.
The IR bills will be the real crunch.
How come all the “default avatars” look like fascist symbols?
Point of correction:
Haven’t bought it, or even read a free copy for years.
And then years before that.
No 34
Wrong ruawake. Insufficient evidence does not mean no evidence. There was certainly a lot of statutory declarations flying about.
Bill, I wasn’t talking to you. I was talking to Evan.
Swannie is announcing a new initiative by the Govt to inject more money into the mortgage market and boost competition in the mortgage lending market, especially for the non bank lenders.
and where the Opposition will get a lot of negative press I think
No 39
So why do you give us these continued long-winded sermons about how terrible the Australian is, complete with full-length quotes?
Sorry, BB, but can we just be clear that you your statement was full of crap.
What’s the bet Turnbull tries to claim it
Should read: That you know your statement…
2x $2B for the non bank and mid-tier bank lenders.
No 45
He rightfully should claim it, given that Swan chastised Turnbull just a few days ago for even suggesting it.
GP
You made the claim about abusing the role as an MP. If you wish to pass judgement with insufficient evidence fair enough.
Sky news Lib stooge Spears is allready saying it was all Allbuls idea and how embarrassing it is for labor and he’s wetting himself trying to get hold of Allbull to hear what he has to say.
Well, maybe I felt guilty. It COULD have been me.
No. 44:
Clearly I read the on-line edition. I just don’t buy or read the paper edition. I thought even you would have realised that, GP.
And, as my mother would have said, “GP, there’s no need to swear”.
Style note: “Crap” is not a becoming word to use at, or in regards to the posts of other bloggers. I’m surprised the New WB didn’t yellow-card you. I’d have sent you to the Naughty Corner, personally.
This is what Bully proposed:
http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2008/09/21/1221935450267.html
… and the quotes are not full-length. They’re just the money quotes out of articles sometimes a couple of thousand words in length. Now please go away for a while, GP. I’m off to walk my dogs. I know you’re upset at the dreadful debut of Messiah #3, Turnbull, but there’s no need to take your frustrations out on us (or my dogs).
The Australian is a privately owned newspaper. It can take whatever political line it likes, it can publish whatever commentators it likes, and it can spin the news any way it likes. It has no obligation, legal or ethical, to be objective, fair, balanced or anything else. Since it chooses to be a Liberal Party propaganda mouthpiece, it behoves all Labor supporters (a) not to buy it (b) not to read it, even online, and (c) not to go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about it all the goddam time.
Buy for now.
Yes it has, when the same journalists that are the worst offenders claim total objectivity, accusing others (e.g. bloggers) of being the biased ones.
To not read it, and to not analyse and try to expose its foibles is ignoring the manouevres of the enemy.
Why did the Govt. introduce and recently enact the Commonwealth Securities and Investment Legislation Amendment Act 2008 if it was all Talcum’s idea?
After Talcum ascended to the throne the Libs were crowing about the money flowing in to the coffers from the big end of town.
Then his first piece of public policy it effectively … “I know. Let’s take an unspecified amout of public money from ordinary taxpayers and give it to my mechant banker mates.”
Surely it’s going to end in disaster!
I think from past experience we should know that oppositions don’t get kudos from the public for “thinking of something first”. All they know is that the government is doing it. How do we know Turnbull wasn’t aware this was on the cards and came up with it? Swan would be harmstrung. He couldn’t release it until all was ready, unlike Turnbull.
GB
The Govt. enacted legislation two friggin months ago to allow them do exactly what they announced today. Yet somehow it is all Talcum’s idea – give me a break.
Which constitutes a “free copy” of the Newspaper; hence my assertion that your original statement was, indeed, crap.
By the way, crap has long been apart of the Australian vernacular and I wouldn’t dare call it an expletive.
No 55
Dennis Shanahan would have a completely legitimate claim in criticising the innards of this blog being a bastion of left wing bias. Heck, aside from Glen, I and very few others, this is a Rudd lovers’ circle jerk.
If someone is effing over my democracy through deliberate partisan disinformation then I reserver the right to complain about it rather than lay down and slovenly take it. Now it would not be a problem if there were a diversity of media ownership and thus a wide diversity of partisan views – but there are not and the rules were changed by our friend again recently just before the last election.
time to hit the road. Dont forget the one man Debate tomorrow morning.
Also, can I just say that Tim Flannery’s obscene hysteria about 80m-higher sea levels is just nonsense.
To back you up RU 59 -
“Mr Swan said the Council of Financial Regulators had last Friday agreed on taking this action, which would be temporary.”
No 62
That is not an argument. No-one is screwing over “your” democracy. Indeed, Mr Shanahan is exercising his democratic rights by offering his own political opinion. The media ownership laws change nothing – Murdoch owned News Limited before the change and he still owns them now.
All the confected outrage is just a facade to disguise your true desire of having a media that solely sings the praises of left-leaning ideals and politicians.
64 – and it has been proven so because it hasn’t happened yet, right GP?
off topic but why doesn’t this suprise me
“Liberals pick ABC broadcaster for by-election”
http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2008/09/26/2375484.htm?section=justin
why are ABC saying Labor will struggle to retain Cabramatta in the bye election when last election result was
ALP 79 Lib 21
No 67
My point is that you don’t win arguments by going to extremes, and to me that weakens the cause of AGW evangelists when they start proclaiming utter tripe like “Greenland will be the only inhabitable place on earth” if we don’t act now. It’s not constructive, it’s hysterical.
No 68
Reba was the de facto member for Coogee, so in effect Cabramatta had no sitting ALP member
. The Libs have a good chance of winning if they run a good campaign. The fact that the candidate is also Vietnamese will also count.
Maybe Shanners is acting as a ghost writer?
GP
Nobody wins an arguement – unless they are part of a debating team. Arguments are a futile exercise, discussion of opinions, on the other hand, can result in a win for all.
A lesson you may learn, when you eventually reach the age where wisdom is more important than scoring points.
I find that The Australian is the highest quality and most informative media publication in the country. I enjoy reading it.
For those of you that don’t, stop whining, read The Age and watch ABC/SBS. It’s that simple.
No 72
ruawake, discursive discourse necessarily involves expounding alternative arguments which may more may not persuade either proponent. If Mr Flannery’s idea of persuasion is to use hysteria, then he will not succeed.
Hear, hear (with the exception of Philip Adams).
I like Bill Leak and there are some other good bits of comedy in The Australian. I don’t think it has ever made a profit in fact it has lost squillions. If Rupert did not want a national newspaper it would cease to exist.
I have worked for Murdoch in the past, he is a great manager. But Kerry used to give better Chrissy Hampers.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24406357-20142,00.html
There goes the credit Bully was trying to claim.
GP
The discursive turn in philosophy and the human sciences rests on the notion that the investigation of meaning is best pursued through a focus on language, since language can be taken as the model of meaningful activity in general. This metaphorical status of language requires that language is not understood merely in the sense of speaking activity but rather that such speaking activity, insofar as it forms and conveys meaning, be taken as exemplary for all social action.
No 77
The Finnigans, Mr Turnbull was simply arguing that the legislative capacity for the government to inject funds into the market had existed for some months but the government had not acted. Indeed, it criticised Turnbull for even suggesting it on the grounds that our Banks were well-regulated.
Mr Swan has nowhere to run and his sudden change of opinion makes him look like an idiot.
No 78
ruawake, you managed not to say anything in that blurb.
Gillard also admits smoking pot:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24404401-601,00.html
Not that GP scores any points. He’s too predictable.
I guess not too many bloggers here claim to be unbiased. Yet that rag, The Australian, continually publishes pontificating op-eds by it’s Liberal urgers to that exact effect, saying how “fact-based” they are, and how much “research” they do, compared to blog posters who are, supposedly, parasites who bloodsuck off their good work etc. etc. Bloodsuckers or not, in a free society we have a right to analyse and criticise the writings of the likes of Shanahan. They publish it. We knock it down every time. It’s like a turkey shoot, actually. They are so obviously bigoted.
GP
Just following your lead Generic.
No 82
BB, do you not read what you say? By your own admission you can’t admit to being unbiased, yet you unashamedly pontificate on the alleged bias of The Australian?
You are a walking double standard!
BB if ever you wanted confirmation re your Liberal bias assertions against The OO this GP – 75 post is it.
No complaints about the OO from GP. I wonder why?
Would anyone care to opine on Talcums PPM number? My view is that this is as good as it gets for him.
No 86
I prefer Albrechtsen over shill Shanahan.
Yes, but when did Turnbull say this. I would argue not months ago, unless you have proof of this of course.
Ru
pick me pick me
Actually I think talcums ppm number is still got a way to go yet
The actual final figure will be a guide as to how competitive the fibs will be come 2010
That’s only a preference GP, not a complaint of bias and no wonder. That’s like saying you prefer Turnbull to Nelson, both are Libs.
No 91
What’s your point GB? I’m sure you enjoy your select choice of Chardonnay socialists in the Age and SMH.
When the leader of a political party cannot get a PPM figure close to his parties primary vote he is in trouble. He only managed 30 because Brenda and Hammock are no longer in the game (temporarily).
I’m guessing he will be down to 20 in 3 months.
I think you have just confirmed BB’s point that the OO is biased toward the Libs with this statement.
Hey listen GP, I don’t mind you pontificating about the genius of whoever it is you’ve got a crush on at the moment, but I do mind being quoted out of contest.
You quote me as saying this:
suggesting I was saying it’s OK for me to be biased but not the Australian. The full quote was a follows (emphasis added):
What I was saying was that at least I admit to being biased. The Australian claims not to be, yet clearly is.
It is most ill-becoming, and outright dishonest of even a twerp like you to go around selectively quoting out of context..
I don’t mind argument, but I do mind dishonesty.
No 94
Certain opinion writers may be conservatively inclined, but to characterise the entire paper as biased is ridiculous.
At the end of the day, you lefties only support free speech as long as it’s left wing speech.
Not at all GP. I want fairness for both sides from all of our news outlets, nothing more and nothing less.
Free Speech is an American concept Generic – we do not have free speech in our constitution – in fact we have Laws that would be unconstitutional in the USA.
If you want free speech, support a bill of rights. Otherwise forget the concept.
Oh puhlease GP, don’t make such absurd statements. Is a paper unbiased because it includes a minor amount of material supporting one political side whilst the vast majority of its published material supports another political side?
The High Court found in the Theophanous case that the Constitution contains an “implied right” of political free speech, because it establishes a parliamentary democracy and a parliamentary democracy cannot functionm without freedom of political speech.
evan14 at number 22:
Three! Don’t forget Akerman, [i]the[/i] most biased commentator in Australia (IMO).
I remember reading him before the election, pasting into his commentary verbatim lines from Howard Ministers (Abbott, if I recall), passing it off as [i]his own[/i] opinion.
He writes to a simple formula (for a knuckle-dragging audience): Liberal good; Labor bad. Can’t get much more simple, or biased, than that.
Take his recent summation of Turnbull. If Turnbull was a Labor leader he would be decrying him for degenerate small [i]l[/i] social attitudes. But because he’s a Liberal, Akerman writes him up as the new saviour … or words practically to that effect.
So GP by your standards Howard, Downer and co were guilty of supporting terrorism the AWB bribes because there was certainly a huge amount of evidence that they were aware of what was going on, or is that different because they are Liberals?
Tom
Adam
The High Court ruled that Governments could no longer justify making laws that took away fundamental rights to discuss and criticise the activities of governments, politicians and public officials.
That is a long way from free speech.
…terrorism through ther AWB bribes…
No 98
ruawake, we have an implied right of political communication in our constitution.
What annoys me more than the very obvious Shanahan’s and Milne’s of this world, is the ABC seemingly and uncritically parroting whatever is dominant in the MSM, as if it’s the Truth. For example, tonight on PM, one of the reporters said that Swan was copying Turnbull’s idea to inject funds to increase liquidity. Now, that is clearly not what Swan’s announcement is about.
No 103
Yes, it is not a complete right of free speech, but the majority of criticisms herewith deal with alleged political bias. And to that extent, the opinion writers are constitutionally protected.
No 106
Swan’s a bloody dill. Why did he criticise Turnbull for suggesting the injection of funds in our own markets?
It’s nearest approach we have to a constitutionally protected right of free speech.
At least Swan doesn’t have to copy his speeches from the Wall St Journal.
“Biased commentators”? Commentators are *supposed* to be biased. That’s what they’re there for, to give their opinions. The correct criticism of Ackerman is not that he’s “biased,” but that he’s a pile of steaming dog turd.
Did it occur to Talcum that it may be best not to telegraph your punches to the market? That the Govt. has a strategy, worked out months ago?
Oh yes great economic guru, good idea, we are thinking about doing it next Friday.
Jesus Wept.
Adam, a reasonably-rounded commentator might be expected to have some light ‘n shade in their views. Say, a small l bias on some topics and a rightward slant on others. But not Akerman. Everything he writes is pro-Liberal, anti-Labor, no matter the topic or the multi-faceted complexity of the issues at hand.
No 111
I agree Adam. Ackerman is useless.
“Free Speech” isn’t the point. It’s that The Australian’s political writers assert, in the most plonking and condescending of tones, that they are unbiased. Wouldn’t mind it at all if they declared their biases, but they actually declare the opposite, and slag off others for THEIR biases.
William, why do all the “generic” avatars on this site look like swastikas?
He could probably be used as fertilser, or landfill.
GP @ 108. Because the banks don’t need it. They’ve parked billions with the RBA, because they’ve got the cash to do so. Swan’s move is very targeted, and oddly what the N.S.W. opposition was calling for just earlier today. I don’t for a minute, imagine that this was what prompted the announcement, BTW, but there you go.
Typical of the dramatic shoot-from-the-hip approach that abnk walahs use. Their life is like one long Amex TV xcommercial. Braces and sleeves rolled up through the night, then out for bagels at 7 when the deal’s done.
Great commercial. Wrong way to run a country.
It’s clear that Labor foresaw that there might be problems looming and wisely made legislative provision for it well in advance.
It’s what I said about football betting scammers the other day: they give half their marks a tip on Team “A” and the other half a tip on Team “B”, then bask in the credit when (inevitably) one of those teams gets up. Spray around enough free advice and some of it is bound to be right. The spin doctor’s job is to make sure that the punters only remember the correct advice.
Sic tansit Turnbull.
When will Politicians be asked “Have you ever snorted coke”? Pot is so ho hum. Maybe Pies could pass his opinion?
No 115
I don’t read Shanahan at all these days. Too boring.
I do read Albrechtsen, and she’s never too shy to declare that she’s a proud conservative.
It is a known fact that Albrechtsen does not wear political knickers. This is the only reason anyone takes any notice of her.
Pity she’s on the Board of the ABC, where “balance” is supposed to be the norm. She should resign in disgrace. Certainly if a Leftie was on the same Board and wrote some of the egregious nonsense she spews out in her (laughingly-called “column”) there would be pitchforks and torches out for them from the right.
No 122
BB, you are impossible. Say whatever you like about Shanahan, but Albrechtsen’s columns are usually very good even if you disagree with her.
Adam in Canberra @ 116. The avatars do very strange things. Mine is a Python Gumby saying “My brain hurts”. Sometimes it shows up, mostly not, but does at Possum’s. Bit like the consistency demonstrated by Her Maj’s loyal opposition.
I think you’re being a little imaginative there, Adam @ 116. Perhaps I should switch to the “MonsterID” avatars used by Possum, where they all look like Piers Akerman.
WB
William @ 125. Avatars as mini-Rorschachs?
No 125
Make the default avatars appear as a hammer & sickle. After all, that is the default philosophical position of 95% of the participants here.
GP
Mine is Socialist International – will that do?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_International
Ru
sorry been punching numbers re talcum
my projection in 12mths is 40-55 ppm
Agree with BB at 122. I find it unconscionable that someone with plainly-declared political bias such as Albrechtsen should be on the board of the national broadcaster. Only under a rodent like Howard could a prominent partisan commercial commentator be elevated to a position of influence of a public broadcaster that professes to pursue balance.
Gusface, are you saying Malcolm is 55 or 40?
Gusface if you are suggesting Talcum will have a preferred PM lead in 12 months I want some of the stuff you are smokin’
Harry
to clarify:Ruaawke asked for projections re talcums ppm
I gave a vaguely specific numbers and then started on where i thought talcum would be in 12 mths.
The 40-55 band is his top end 55 and his bottom end 40
BTW how old is talcum?
Cuppa @ 131. There’s been no balance evident at the ABC for some time. Any amount of dumbing down, sure; any amount of just regurgitating whatever is being spun in the MSM, increasingly so.
24/10/1954 Freaky – the same day I was born. 54 next month.
Gusface @ 134. Ta. I think Malcolm is the same age as Kevvie. Fiftyish but early.
No 131
Cuppa, how do you explain that obscene piece of lard, Mr Philip Adams, who has no qualms declaring his hatred for conservatives. How dare the ABC employ him! Shame on them!
If all else fails Talcum can get the missus to mail out a another personal letter to all Australians saying how wonderful Talcum is and pleading for everyone to vote for him.
No 137
Rudd is younger.
Ru
cmon dude that ones old hat,isnt it what im snorting
re his ppm ,I just thought i’d use poss’s tres excellent charts as a guide and then do some extrapolation.
While I agree that the Possum charts are tres good, we only have 2 weeks worth of data.
I predict Malcolm will have a PPM in his favour of of 95/5.
HSO, if they’re just going to C&P their news from the mainstream media, then there’s really not much point in having a (so-called) independent news “service”. Obviously budgetary restrictions have a lot to do with the “cheapness” of the product presented.
I guess that was the conservatives’ intention. They weren’t game to go with their ideological inclination to privatise it, so they bastardised it and starved it to the point where it’s such a abomination that even progressives, who would normally staunchly defend a public broadcaster, would be relieved to see it flogged off or killed off.
GP that’s what I call confidence lol
Ru
Im not using the 2 week charts only-if i did talcum would be stratospheric
More running with a line of thought,first espoused at Mumble,that some equilibrium will return to the pendulum
The msm barrage before during and after the election is causing a SHORT term drift which post the next fed election will resume the drift to labor
Talcum is a player and his impact is best overstated rather than downplay his appeal
138
Generic Person
1) They also have Michael Duffy + the Insider panelists, which includes Akerman.
2) Albrechtsen was put on the board, which was more than a symbolic appointment by Howard.
GP, your strange concept of bias strikes again. Adams proclaims his biases. People can adjust their perspectives accordingly if they feel the need. But he is not in a position to pass judgment on other ABC employees or influence decision making in the ABC as Albrechtsen is without being accountable.
BTW, are you as fat as Adams or do you feel safe to make insults from your obscurity?
GP… I’ll give you 100-1 on that
No 148
Janet hasn’t sacked Phil, so I think the perceived bias factor is in fact a meaningless platitude.
Well, I’ve said whatever I like about Shananhan, and I’ll do the same for Albrechtsen, if you don’t mind, GP.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but if you could take your eyes off Janet’s nether regions you would realise shes a disgrace to the notion of political “balance” and should be sacked forthwith from the ABC Board.
A wannabe Sharon Stone with spectacles and a bad attitude: our Janet in a nutshell.
(Apologies to Sharon)
I (amazingly) agree with you re. Phillip Adams. Well past his prime and should be put out to one those pastures he owns (although I did like how he looked after the stray kelpie… a human being, if somewhat past his prime… a dog lover can’t be all bad).
No 151
BB, she can’t exercise unilateral influence over the board anyway. Either way she is a great woman and a great journalist!
Sorry GP, your assertions are meaningless platitudes.
There has been discernible pattern of pro conservative parties bias and anti Labor party bias in the ABC since the appointment of Albrechtsen and Windschuttle by Howard.
Hence Tim Palmer’s appointment as EP of Lateline.
Cuppa @ 144. Much the same number as has been done to the public health system in terms of starvation of funds, however, I really object to the C&P rubbish.
William, who is Tim Palmer?
Perhaps thats true *its time*… but the ABC was in the past a bit of a “left” kind of place. So I guess it’s fair enough it swung the other way for a bit.
Swings and roundabouts
HSO, suffice to say that he’s a person who wouldn’t have been made EP of Lateline if Albrechtsen and Windschuttle had anything to do with it. I should stress though that I wouldn’t accuse him of partisanship.
No 153
Your so-called “discernible pattern” of pro-conservative bias is just a delusion. If anything, the ABC has become very balanced. It is fair to both sides.
No 158
I would agree William.
Don’t overreach GP
Spam Box @ 157. The perceived bias one way or the other of the ABC has been done to death, really, and though I’m guilty of having another whinge here, it’s probably as useful as the ham at the Bar Mitsvah.
William
you should stress that he takes no shit either!
Thanks, William. I shall do my research.
No 162
The fact that we all whinge from time to time about the bias of the ABC, suggests that they’ve probably got the balance right.
Personally, I love the ABC. It is my favourite channel.
Just trying to be fair and honest H.S.O… nothing wrong with that…is there?
This might be a good place to start, HSO.
Anyone interested about Palmer can read this Bolshevik Crusader (aka Crikey) account:
http://www.crikey.com.au/Media-Arts-and-Sports/20070919-My-year-at-Media-Watch-EP-tells.html
Spam Box @ 166. It was more a mea culpa, rather than any go at you, Spam.
“I get all my news from Spiderman comics” (G W Bush)
William @ 167. Ohhhhh. Kaaaa.
The sooner Media Watch is abolished, the better.
Onya, Spam. BTW, that’s a very funny name.
Lets face it, all of us on this site who are left leaning, slightly or otherwise, GP wouldn’t be capable of discerning bias by the media anyway.
GP @ 173. Would you care to list everything you’d like to see abolished, demolished, exited stage left?
Nope just media watch. I’d like to see it replaced by a longer 1 hour show that has detailed oversights of alleged poor journalism.
I haven’t watched Media Watch for ages. Used to really like Stuart Littlemore as host. However, since GP has denounced it, it must have something going for it. I will make a point of watching it again ASAP.
GP, I’m astonished. Do you have any influence with the sainted Janet A.?
177
hear hear
No 179
No, I don’t know her personally, but I have met her and heard her speak. She does look fabulous though.
MediaWatch always had a tabloid flavour about it – necessitated because of the time limitation. Haven’t watched it for ages. It is a subject that deserves more time for any sort of decent analysis. Poor reflction on ABC that they weren’t prepared to give it the time needed.
Showing my age I know but it always seemed like one of those 5 minute “fillers” the ABC used to run to make up the extra time in the half-hour slot because they didn’t carry advertising.
GP @181. Each to their own.
181…
I’m not sure which scenario is scarier, she was sans glasses or you?
LOL
If anyone wanted any further evidence of what I’ve been kvetching about with the ABC, just go and have a look at the headline news online. My concern about this is that with the endless negativity and lack of proper analysis, we’re stuffed. I don’t just mean those who would prefer a more left leaning gov’t., but all of us.
GP,
How’s Malcolm travelling?
No 186
What is the problem with that headline? I’ve seen worse in the Herald and Terror.
By the way the headline is:
No 187
I only just watched the Q&A episode from last night on the ABC Website. I think he did very well. He has some work to do in ensuring he offers concise answers, especially on policy – but I think that has more to do with the fact that the Liberal Party hasn’t released any refreshed policies as of yet, apart from the fuel excise and pension increase things.
Yes. GP @ 186 & 187. Certainly, there are worse in the Hun and Terror. You, well I, expect it. I expect neutral headlines and reporting from the ABC, such as if you are actually reporting something that some one else has already reported, you say so. It isn’t all that much to ask.
He got his butt kicked by Gillard in QT this week, as everyone who saw it knows. Roxon is getting better all the time too.
No 191
HSO, you’re overanalysing. I don’t see anything overtly biased about the headline. Swan denied stealing the policy from Turnbull. Big deal.
No 192
Gillard is a nonsense.
This is what the Libs refuse to understand. They spent 9 months phaffing around with a leader that was neer going to cut it.
Indirectly, they alllowed all the new Ministers a free ride to get their feet under the desk and get on top of their portfolios.
Now they’ve changed all their personnel and Labor is ready and charged.
This is going to be a massacre.
No 195
I don’t think so.
Gillard is rapidly becoming a parliamentary killer shark, and you know it. She’s been studying those Thatcher tapes to good effect. The modulation, the disdainful smile, the elegant sarcasm, it’s all there.
I dislike her whiney elocution, but she is nonetheless an effective performer. I miss Costello though.
“Cheech T” denies stealing a lid from Swan’s locker… news at 10… hash @ 1.30 [-)
Watch, compare and learn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2f8nYMCO2I
No one misses Costello.
Adam, Gillard is no Thatcher.
GP,
This is a politcal reonstruction of the Sam Peckinpah film, “The Wild Bunch”. It had all the victims dying in a slow motion of gore and degradation.
This is the Liberal’s fate for the next few years.
Deal with it!
Keep dreaming GG.
GP @ 194. She’s a very effective nonsense, I would submit. Julie blue eyes is going to have trubble with Swan, as she’s got absolutely no idea, none, zilch, about the economy. A mere assertion on my part, but hey, it hasn’t held you back.
GP,
Whistling in the dark I see.
Thank goodness
Thatcher is captivating. The greatest British PM in history.
Gillard is one of the finest polliticians around at the moment – dwarfs Turnbull in ability, style, control, strategy and delivery. All Turnbull really is hoping to trade on is a media programmed character manufacture and creating a myth of abilities higher than they are. In other words Turnbull has to rely on being faked into being a desireable person to elect. He is unable to do this himself using his charcter and abilities as they are.
So if I’ve got this right Morgan has gone from 55.5/45.5 to 57/43 since Turnbull’s election to the leadership. So why is the MSM wetting themselves with excitement on just how well Turnbull is doing. As they showed from the minute Rudd became opposition leader, the polls dont seem to matter when they dont support their argument
TP,
Dear oh Dear.
A measure of a politician is what she delivers to her constituency. Julia is a polly on the rise, but, let us not associate mystical powers before she actually delivers.
GP,
Where was Winston Churchill?
GP @ 28
You really need to seek help about that.
She is a good as any of them there at the moment and certainly superior to Turnbull on performance these past 18 months. And she has negotiated the tougher road to the top.
I did not have a comment @ 28 Winston.
TP,
Tell me, how is life better because of Julia?
Oh for goodness sake, this Saturday is the Festival of the Boot, Part 1. No one is going to be paying attention in Oz.
No 216
It’s much more loathesome.
loathsome
The greatest PM Britain has ever had was William Ewart Gladstone, “the people’s William.” Churchill was a great character and a great war leader, but not much use for anything else. Thatcher had brilliant political skills, I grant, but mostly used in the service of evil. Attlee deserves credit for achieving more of the program he was elected on than any other PM.
OK – @ 208 – you know what I mean.
Anyway, Gillard is certainly the star performer in Parliament at the moment.
But she needs to deliver on policy – her announcements on education and IR fall well short of what should be expected of a labor Government elected on a promise of abolishing Howard’s legacy.
Turnbull,
Now here is a man who is the head sales rep for the Liberal party used car lot.
The Liberal mark has done a few million miles but has blown a gasket & head needed replacing with a oil change. A wax & polish and WOW … “as flash as a rat with gold teeth”.
But a look under the bonnet says urrghh – needs new plugs, battery, gear box, exrtra degrasing, a starter motor change & the wheel allignment suspiciously keep veering to the hard right when it should be in the centre!!
No longer “car of the year” & driver polls suggest its best mile are behind it. A flash sales man but still the same old LEMON!!!
Harry,
You say that as if it is a bad thing.
Please clarify
No 221
Perhaps Howard’s legacy wasn’t so bad after all. It’s nice that the ALP has had the reality check it so dearly required.
I think you answered your own question…
Thatcher’s greatest skill – like Howard’s- was her own longevity.
Would YOU buy a car from this man???
http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/
No 226
And Winston, how do you suppose she remained in power for so long? Because her policies transformed Britain from a walled garden of insidious protection, to an open, freer economy.
No 227
Mr Turnbull takes public transport.
I suppose the Roller is getting a tune up!
No 230
He owns a Prius.
SNIP: Personal attack on other commenter deleted – The Management.
SNIP: Response to above comment deleted – The Management.
SNIP: Comment deleted as part of a purge of the whole exchange – The Management.
SNIP: Comment deleted as part of a purge of the whole exchange – The Management.
SNIP: Comment deleted as part of a purge of the whole exchange – The Management.
Growler @ 223. I thought I’d made it clear. Please tell me where it’s not. BTW, will have to respond tomorrow, as am still recovering from drive up and back to Q’L'D, little sister’s death, and so forth.
My condolences HSO.
224
I think many Laborites owe the man a beer or three.
Howard went the full Monty but he blew it.. For a very long time, nobody is going to trust a Lib Leader as soon as he starts taking off his jacket
GP @ 236
Never stopped you!
No 239
Turnbull will be in the lodge in 2010.
Thank you very much, GP. I sincerely hope you never have to confront this, but if you do, pray for the Catholics to look after you, if you don’t want your own way of dying.
A ski lodge perhaps
No 243
You wish.
241
Do retired MP’s get invited for tea?
I know
LOL… Dario….The lodge? No way The new fresh Prez of Kirribilli … In his dreams!!
Wot a silly exchange. Time to disappear.
Go Cats.
The business spectator agrees that Gillard’s “Forward with Fairness” is simply “Workchoices Lite”:
And:
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/End-of-an-IR-era-JTRZP?OpenDocument&src=sph
241
Anything’s possible GP, but no, that wont happen. (It would take a extreme event and even then, good ol Fanta-pants will do the job)
Sit back for abit… stir the pot(pot’s?) for a while and have fun.. There’s not much else to do
GP @ 249
Sadly I have to agree. The approving comments from business groups says it all.
However, it might be a mistake to write off unions already – their Workchoices campaign indicated that, given the resources, mobilising the community can bring about change. And recent EBA’s for teachers suggest unions can still achieve things for their members.
Mind you GP, if the unions got all their own way you would be on here complaining incessantly. “Rudd is a puppet of the unions”.
I think it shows how middle of the road it is. A lite Workchoices beats the s…t out of the full very unfair version.
Sadly not much for the students though.
I generally think Shaun Carney is a good writer. His piece (not on line) about the AWB Commission findings “Decline Of Governance In Australia” was Walkley Award material.
But Carney’s Achille’s Heel is Peter Costello, possibly because he wrote the first biography of Cozzie. Carney made a confident prediction 2 weeks ago that for the ensuing fortnight it would be all-Costello, all the time in the media, once the memoirs were published. With the book now out the front of my local bookstore with the macrame how-to’s and the Angler’s Guide To NSW Waterways, and $24.95 at that, I guess he was wrong.
Today, Carney laments the onset of Messiah-ism and the personal “narrative”. “Whither democracy?” he seems to be asking. This is a little rich from someone who literally wrote the book on political biography.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/death-of-debate-20080926-4osm.html
Two weeks ago Carney opined about the alcopops tax being dead in the water because it was so unpopular with the electorate. He had nothing to back that up, except Liquor Industry and Coalition spin about the reasons Gippsland swung away from the government. Turns out Shaun is just another pundit, making it up as he goes along, like all the rest. He soberly informs us why things are happening and why they are not… all out of his own head. Newspoll this week tells us the alcopops tax is approved by a robust majority of all voters (and presumably an even bigger majority of those who have teenage daughters).
Yes, I know his (and the others’) columns are labelled “Opinion”, but when was the last time anyone saw the words “In my opinion…” in any of them? Instead, we get pummelled with bare-faced statements of fact, as if they are etched in stone, Moses-wize.
Meanwhile at the News Ltd. bunker, Shanahan yesterday told us that taxpayers would be wondering why Rudd bothered to address the UN. Oh really? He’s spoken to a scientific sample of a couple of thousand of them, has he? Since yesterday? Hmm…
The one that still sticks in my craw was the ABC news headline after the 2006 Budget, “They’re on a winner… and they know it.” When I emailed and said this type of language should have been nowhere near a TV news bulletin intro, read as “news”, I was politely told to naff-off. They had experts in politics, and anyway it was only their opinion (which was precisely my point, actually). That particular expert, Jim Middleton, is now wandering the China Seas, filing unwatched reports for “Asia-Pacific Focus”. Half his luck.
Then there was the narrative about how bad Labor was doing in the polls in 2006 and through the first half of 2007. Another ABC brainstorm, although clearly inspired by the “we own Newspoll” gurus at The Australian. Totally wrong, but somehow it stuck for quite a long time after its Use-By date.
A running commentary throughout this year has been how “Labor has wrecked the economy”. If you scratch the opinionistas hard you’ll get a grudging admission that they don’t actually think it’s true, but that * the public * thinks it’s true, and that’s all that matters. It’s not for them to actually educate the public to the contrary. They’re commentators, not participators (try to stifle your guffaws please). Whatever… I think this one’s on it’s last legs too. Here’s why.
You could possibly argue that the odd interest rate tweak here or petrol price hike there might (or might not have) been handled better by the new socialist mob, but in the face of the economic tsunami that’s just swamped us (and there may be more to come), a bit of contentious fluffing of lines by Wayne Swan pales into insignificance. Labor now has the chance to re-write the narrative; to go back over the past year and to put it all in the context of the Sub-Prime Crisis, out of which we seem to have a good chance of emerging relatively intact thanks to some bi-partisan measures taken a few months ago to quietly amend fiscal regulations, allowing the government to swap cash for AAA mortgage securities held by the small banks and independent mortgage companies. Incidentally, it might be time to polish up the “Coalition is wrecking the Surplus” trumpets again, as we’re going to need every cent of it to buy those securities and still have some slush left over.
Paradoxically (I was going to use the word “ironically” but I’m trying to break the habit of decades of misuse), the Wall St. Meltdown might just shut the economy whingers and carpers up for good and leave Labor on top as reasonable, even prescient economic managers. Maybe slow-and-steady really does win the race?
Wrapping up a paradox inside an enigma and yes, lacing it with irony, everyone’s hero, Peter Costello, doesn’t seem to have been the one man publicity and bookselling juggernaut that Shaun Carney, pundit and political savant, thought he would be. The book’s been a flop and Cozzie has retired to the back bench, never to return. It’s funny though, that Costello was right about one thing: there really *was* an “economic tsunami” heading our way.
Thing was, the Libs and Nats waited for The Wave to hit for so long that Labor won in a trot, on a cry of “What are they scared of? We Want an election!”. The public started believing that even Labor couldn’t f**k up the economy as bad as Cozzie said they would (and, whew, they didn’t). The meltdown that Peter wanted so bad has now come to benefit Swan if he plays his cards right. Sub-Prime is a plenary indulgence for all economic sins, going begging, and cheap too… like those old scapulas the Catholic schoolkids among us used to buy, believing that the purchase of one would mean we could wank as much as we liked, and still go to heaven.
Of course there’ll be new narratives, but the old Labor-bashing ones of “bad economic managers”, “tourist Prime Minister” and, Shaun Carney’s favourite, “the unpopular alcopops tax” and its Budget-orientated ilk are heading for the Big Otto Bin of political discourse. Soon we’re going to see most of the Budget passed, the surplus (now urgent and coveted by the public) maintained, plus a consequent blossoming of love for Labor as people wake up and realise that we could well have just dodged a bullet economically. It may not have been entirely Rudd and Swan’s doing, but they were the guys that had their fingers on the Ferrari at the appropriate time.
The past couple of weeks have shown us the perils of procrastination in the hulk-like shape of Peter Costello drifting off over the political horizon as the tsunami he predicted helps the other side instead, the downside of opinionation as narratives expire in bucketloads, and the end of the first chapter of “Rudd Era” history. Dennis will be shuffling his little pieces of paper hoping for inspiration. Shaun will have to look for a new hero to write about. And Labor just might be able to start governing the country…. in my opinion, of course.
In a piece bitchily titled “Two Cheers for Rudd”, St. Paul Kelly, grudingly gives Rudd a pretty big tick:
The crown’s already on his head, actually. It may have landed there due to a combination of good luck, bad luck and nervous economic conservatism, but it’s there just the same. All Rudd has to do now is tighten the chin-strap and it’ll be hard to knock off. Break out the alcopops. Let’s have some fizz.
Heh, heh, the public are unlikely to want to change horses in mid-tsunami.
I find the way the MSM simply accepts whatever the spin is to be — strange?
Turnbull’s front bench was acclaimed as ‘focussing on the economy’.
Who made that declaration? The Liberal Party press release – and the media just accepted it, despite the lack of economic credentials on the front bench.
Then they pontificate that it’s their job to report and analyse, not ours.
Well, happy to let them do it – but they haven’t so far.
Zoom
the chance to catch them out (ala nelson being harassed by neale) is there every time.
It takes commitment and a bit of work (emails,calls,letters,posting on multiple blogs etc) but as was proven with “neale v nelson” shite, if you get on it early you can squash it before it gets legs.
I recieved some great emails from people who were concerned and jumped on the bandwagon (particular from the two friends on the flight) and posting for 10 hours or so on various blogs smacked that smear down good.
We can all be “media overseers” the only thing is whether you then do something about it!
256:
Well, I did some original research myself. I mosied down to the local bookshop and saw Cozzie’s tome out the front for $24.95. Previous visits saw it drop from $49.95 over a few days.
From this I made the reasonable deduction that Peter Costello is of little interest to even the Liberals in my (very) leafy suburb in Sydney, and of none to the Battlers out in the hinterland.
Thus, all the pundits’ pontificating and supposition over the past 10 months about Costello as “Messiah”, speculating on the big move he’d be making to co-incide with the book release, based on nothing more than wishful thinking, has been conclusively proved to be (and I use the Latin term), crapola.
All they had to do was read the polls, their own polls, the ones they “own”. We Bludgers looked at the same evidence they had in front of them, over the same period, and knew their predictions were on a hiding to nothing. Yet we still got scolded for being unprofessional muckrakers who parasite off their good work and “insider” connections etc. etc.
Shanahan’s audio piece yesterday showed what a disorganised piece of negativity wrapped up in a cloak of professionalism he really is. Every third word was “uhm..”, every fourth word was “aah…” and his conclusions were wrong (if statistics on his wrongness are any guide). I’m amazed they still have the piece linked in the on-line front page. Here we see Dennis Shanahan LITERALLY making it up as he goes along. He wasn’t even reading from notes! This was Shanahan unplugged, straight into the squwark box.
It’s actually a great insight into how his mind works. He had one key message: “Rudd bolted to the airport” (as if Rudd was “escaping” or feeling guilty for being in NY). Once he’d got that out, it was all hesitant padding, “uhms..” and “aahs…”. No argument. No evidence. Just a complete fairy story on his part, already overshadowed by events. With a little nasty sting in the tail that Rudd was using a taxpayer-finded VIP jet to race back for the Grand Final, this little piece of prissiness was complete.
There have been a few questions lately about why so much concern over The Australian. “Don’t buy it!” and so on. But the turkies who write for it, and the rest, like even the usually reliable Shaun Carney’s poor efforts over the past few weeks, are the ones who have arrogated to themselves the right to scribble the first draft of history. If they’re not challenged here, who’ll do it for us?
Now that Tim Dunlop’s blogs have closed down, there is one less place left to get rapid, interactive and decent lefty criticism. You can bet the pundits will be reading. Tell ‘em off. Maybe some of it will stick and we might get an improvement in quality (yeah, I know…)
It wouldn’t be hard, starting from their current position of being wrong almost every time they go near a keyboard, or in Dennis’ case, rambling the latest Canberra talking points into a mobile phone. He asks why Rudd bothered to go. I wonder if Dennis ever asked himself the same question?
September, 2001: P.M. Howard flies to Washington and New York to kiss the feet of the high and mighty amidst the rubble of the WTC and is feted by the MSM as a Messiah for his prescient timing.
September, 2008: P.M. Rudd flies to Washington and New York to network with the world’s bankers amidst the rubble of Wall Street and is mocked by the MSM for not attending QT.
It seems they prefer a frequent liar to a frequent flier.
… and for not arguing the toss with certified fruitcake, Fielding, and being humiliated in the process… “Let them eat cake: While the world melts down Mr. Rudd, afer cancelling his trip to the centre of world finance in an incompetent panic, has been meeting with Mr. Nobody Fielding trying to get his alcopops tax through…”
Fielding will have to allow the budget to pass now. Events have overtaken him.
The Australian is NOT the MSM, thanks.
But they set much of the agenda, like it or not… particularly at the ABC. Half their journos are in an ABC studio, or on a talk-back phone line on any given day.
Anyway, in view of your earlier (quite valid I think) criticisms about concentrating on the OO, I brought up Carney from Fairfax as another example. These guys have been getting it so wrong, for so long, with no evidence to back them up… it’s a scandal, yet it becomes common wisdom unless it’s called.
If you can stomach it, have a listen to Shanahan making it up as he goes along. You can hear him striving for negatives.
http://media.theaustralian.com.au/multimedia/2008/09/26-shanahan/index.html
I get my news from The Onion.
ruawake,
So it looks as though the three of us are “Scorpio’s”.
Seems as though Turnbull is the odd man out though!
Checking that the link actually worked, I only noticed the headline for the first time:
Let me see… “Let’s criticise Rudd for saying he’s going to NY to contribute to debate about the global economic crisis, and for actually speaking about it, by being snarky and claiming the global economic crisis overshadowed his address on… the global economic crisis. He should have stayed home and not dealt with the global economic crisis so we could criticise him for not dealing with the global economic crisis.”
Too stupid for words.
Scorpio
does being on the cusp count (libra side of course)
Paul Kelly is perhaps the best political writer at News Ltd, and he usually gives Rudd a fair go!
Well, I suppose “Two Cheers For Rudd” is better than a Bronx cheer.
BTW, re. the $4 billion non-bank lenders assistance.
Another government promise fulfilled… “putting downward pressure on interest rates.”
Would have been impossible to do – too “socialist” – at any other time. Superb timing by Rudd and Swan. Turnbull trying to “me too” it just looks churlish. He is not the Treasurer, and had no business irresponsibly brainstorming out loud on the 7.30 Report.
Gusface @ 266,
It’s OK as long as you don’t have an accident in straddling the fence.
Look what happened to Nelson!
Shaun Carney did a bit of re-writing of history with this blatantly false statement.
Any reasonably aware person over the age of 40 knows that it was Bob Hawke’s well documented and well known reputation as a “skilled advocate & negotiator” during his lengthy term as ACTU President that paved the way for his rapid elevation to the Prime Ministership.
Hawke had been touted for years as a future Prime Minister and a large percentage of the population had looked forward to it and supported it.
Bob Hawkes’ approval ratings and PPM ratings were unprecedented for the time.
It seems that Swanee’s investment in mortgage securities was discussed at the 20-20 Summit.
So will all those who condemned the summit as a “talk fest” and waste of money admit they were wrong?
It is very clear. Scattered throughout his article is first class evidence that there is very little evidence.
The only trouble with this line of thinking is that it doesn’t work. If that 2% of the electorate “had” been convinced then we would be still reading about PM Howard.
There’s a big difference between spreading rumour & innuendo across the media and putting forward genuine, balanced information about a candidates early days. In reality, the majority of us couldn’t give a stuff.
As regards leadership contenders, people generally have already made up their minds about their suitability and are more focussed on the ability of the candidate to do the job.
This was clearly demonstrated with regard Rudd, Nelson and now, Turnbull. I can’t foresee any great movements in Turnbull’s approval and PPM ratings unless there is a dramatic blunder by Rudd. That is highly unlikely as he is too cautious and too able to let that happen.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/death-of-debate-20080926-4osm.html?page=-1
for goodness sake Cats, come on!
With all the talk about media commentators earlier, one person in particular slipped quietly under the radar. Christopher Pearson. Loved the title of his article.
“Conservatives under siege”.
He starts off in an unsubstantiated attack on the new GG, moves on to a glowing appraisal of the qualities of the remnants of Howard’s front bench;
After earlier mentioning this;
And proceeds to give advice to Turnbull on his selection of more suitable front bench candidates.
Then has a totally unsubstantiated shot at Rudd & his Government;
Loved that, and then praises Turnbull for his forward thinking & wisdom in appointing three known & proud climate change sceptics to positions where they can damage the Rudd policy intentions in this regard and match up with Wong, Hunt & not mentioned but inferred, Garrett.
And the last paragraph on this is even better. Pearson is either a traitor, a goose, or worse still, both.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24406825-7583,00.html
Meeow!
I’m actually a Demon, but my sisters are Cats so I am barracking for them today.
There is no doubt at all of course, and it is becoming more blatant – the murdoch media are simply working for the Liberal party with the brief of getting them elected no matter what. Dishonesty is their ony tool since they have no facts which could achieve their goal.
I suspect they put the occassional Labor friendly piece in to act as a release valve to ensure their corruption of journalism doesn’t blow up in their faces and cause miffed persons to start making loud public and direct ‘person on person’ demands to explain themselves.
“I’m actually a Demon”
most of us knew that already
Pearson was a former Rat Man speech writer and Downer got into hot water in Senate Estimates for payments that seemed excessive, paid to Pearson for writing his speeches.
Seems as if all is not well in conservativeville.
And I never heard Minchin was much chop as Finance Minister? Rather the contrary. so, that bit was a good move by Talcum. But Coonan as shadow FA???
I am not sure that Lenore Taylor had any idea what she wanted to achieve with this article, but what “IS’ evident is that she is determined to take some of the gloss of the Rudd Government. It certainly contradicts aspects of Pearson’s article but has the same intent.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24408102-7583,00.html
Yeah, I watched her effort on Lateline up against Tanner, earlier this afternoon.
If the usual LL Lib reps didn’t have their intensive coaching on the current “talking sheet points” and the ability to try and talk over their opponents to minimise any damaging points being made against them, then they would be more hopeless than they usually are.
Ah, Steve Fielding in a spot of bother.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24408040-5001021,00.html
Coonan is one of the more incompetent on the Lib front bench. She has no idea on anything except feigning indignation and trying to score political points (which she usually fails at dismally). How she manages to stay on the front bench speaks volumes for the lack of talent they have.
Wow… what the hell was he thinking? I wonder if that will make him more or less easy to deal with in the senate?
“and the ability to try and talk over their opponents”=Chris Pyne, the horrid little man
As was blindingly obvious throughout the week, even Labor with Rudd away mangled Turnbull’s new lineup. Peason must be weeping tears of blood.
In the same 7 days, Sub-Prime became a cast iron explanation for any economic woes that befall the country (or is Turnbull still going to pursue the “talking up inflation” line?…No, I didn’t think so…).
Swan will make good with Labor’s promise to “put downward pressure on interest rates” with a concrete act of deliberate (and deliberated) policy: his $4 billion slug to the non-bank lenders. And Turnbull’s crowing that it’s bi-partisan! How neat is that when the Big End Of town comes squealing to the Libs?
The Budget will have to be passed by Fielding and Xenophon (perhaps with a couple of face-saving concessions tipped to them, if Labor are in a good mood), or else they’ll be pilloried for sabotaging the Surplus, now so vitally needed to pump-prime home mortgages and thereby get the Big Banks off the Battlers’ backs.
Inflation pressures will ease as nervous businesses all over the world try not to rock the already shaky economic boat by gouging their customers.
All in all, what old Harry Wilson said turns out to be true…
A week really *is* a long time in politics.
The Liberal party are bereft of any obvious talent. They have Bishop who is not so much a talent but a draw card.
Turnbull said to be talented by some but somehow managed to be beaten by Swan when shadow Treasurer. This same man undermining or attacking the head of Treasury (Liberal appointed) and the head of the RBA when he didn’t get his own way or they wouldn’t tell the same story as him. And when he was a minister he did not perform that well and sometimes his interviews tv and radio were painful. In fact the only reason that Turnbull became the next most acceptable leader in the public’s eye is that he seemed more moderate/left wing. The very thing the party will not let him be in the role of Leader.
Mr Hockey has had a personality transplant and has become a angry bitter man seemingly with nothing to say.
And so on.
The gene pool is emabarassingly short of known talent and there is no possible way they could win an election based on talent. Hence the media’s increasing desperation and willinging to become more blatant in their attacks on Rudd.
The one term government meme started when Rudd Labor’s poll figures were still stellar. It was in fact the announcement of a media program.
Good point Tom.
Whether Swan stole the cash-injection idea from Turnbull or not, he sure stole a march on him. Not only does the plodding Wayne get to save the Battlers, reduce interest rates and look like a hero, but Turnbull agrees with him all the way… spent quite a bit of time on QANDA insisting that he did. Who are the Big-4 banks going to whinge to now? Maybe bi-partisanship will be sent to the sin bin for a while.
Now, if only the Warriors get up against Manly, my week is complete.
Given that this decision was only made possible after the Government passed specific legislation to allow it to do so a few months ago, Turnbull is full of it
Isn’t Melbourne supposed to be winning the thug-ball GF? Or did they get out-thugged?
Wow, reminds me of Alexander Downer! She’ll be in shadow foreign affairs for the next decade.
The Govt. being good economic stewards and listening to ideas of others decided it would be prudent to have legislation in place, just in case it was ever needed.
They then decided to consult with the mortgage security sector and these consultations were leaked to Talcum. So what does Talcum do with this information? Recklessly plays politcis.
He knows Swan will not make an announcement ’till the markets close for the weekend. So he plays silly buggers in QT. Then claims it as his own idea.
And people think this guy will make PM.
Congrats to Hawthorn!
ruawake… didn’t Turnbull suggest the idea last weekend though? Wasn’t that when Swan claim it was an irresponsible idea?
Talk about churlish! Bishop is still claiming ownership of the bailout idea. Who does she think she’s fooling? In her rush to take credit for pennies from heaven, she doesn’t realise their strategy of blocking the Budget just went up in smoke. The Surplus is king now. Anyone who threatens it will be crucified.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/27/2376016.htm
Itep, you don’t organise a bailout like that overnight. Turnbull was vague. He said his piece when the only bailout that was happening was the buying up of bankrupt securities and investment firms. Swan was right to criticise him for what he said, when he said it.
Swan’s idea was to pre-empt the possibility of bankruptcy, reduce interest rates and keep things on an even keel, not buy up worthless junk bonds.
Well I know next to nothing about finance or markets etc. so I can’t really comment. Sort of makes it hard to follow these political arguments when you’re economically illiterate!
In a nutshell, last Sunday Turnbull said the government should bail out existing mortgages, just like the US is going to do. What the government has announced is $4b for NEW mortgages, not like the US. According to Swan the decision was also made on the previous Friday, BEFORE Turnbull’s announcement.
Keep reading, Itep, you’ll learn a lot here.
It’s not Swan’s job to check the transcripts of every Turnbull interview and analyse them for economic nuances and accidental parallel ideas. It’s his job to introduce an idea, well-planned in advance and not commentate out loud on it until the formal announcement is made. All kinds of nasty things can happen when the Treasurer of the country brainstorms off the cuff about whether his opponent’s idea is a good one or not. Markets get nervous, there are potential runs on banks (I man, what if the market wrongly interpreted comments on this by Swan – before it happened – as panic by the government, as happened in America? The speculation would have been horrible to behold), investors offlay shares, mortgagees start fretting and generally things get very bleak indeed.
Even if Turnbull’s was the same idea as Swan had in the pipeline, Swan had to deny it to try to arrest possible panic in a jittery market.
This is Talcum’s thought bubble –
“We know that it has been very, much harder for banks, particularly the second-tier banks and financial institutions, to refinance mortgages and that’s one of the reasons why the cost of mortgages has gone up, why interest rates have gone up. Now, in other markets, the government, particularly in the US, the government is taking a role, proposing to buy back, buy some of these securities, in effect to provide additional liquidity to take the pressure off mums and dads. As George Bush said, it’s not just a question of Wall Street, it’s a question of main street. Now, again, we’ve got the capacity to do that through the office of financial management, which manages the Commonwealth’s, you know, asset base, if you like, liquid asset base. ”
Thats it – this is the whole basis of Mesmer and Avuncular’s claim that it was Talcum’s idea.
ruawake, it would be nice to know on what date Talcum’s thought bubble occurred because I can remember a couple of economists bringing up the issue just prior to the 20/20 summit and then there was this paper:
http://works.bepress.com/joshuagans/17/
Plagiarism seems to be rife on the Opposition side at present.
Ruawake, it’s also a crock because all four of the banks have parked billions in cash with the RBA. They don’t need it because they have liquidity.
Update from Josh Gans here:
http://economics.com.au/
steve
Last Sunday – interview with Oakes.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=635081
HSO, I think that this is aimed at second tier lenders such as Aussie Home Loans etc. rather than the big four banks.
That is correct
Yep, steve and Dario, that’s why I said earlier that Turnbull’s proposition was pretty stupid, given that the big 4 didn’t need any injection of funds. They’ve got heaps of cash, parked currently with the RBA. Ir’s also why I said Swan’s move was a targetted one. Much more sensible.
Turnbull is a goose, and the run-up to Xmas is a dangerous time for geese.
H.S.O. the representative of the big banks went public after Turnbull spouted this rubbish and said they didnt need his bailout.
Turnbul and Bishop are out there trying to deceive. They are claiming that the “genious” Turnbul thought of this plan all by himself and that Swan copied him. Where in fact this has been in the pipeline for the last 6 months waiting to be applied, if it was required and then proceed with the plan.
For Turnbul to bring this forward at such a touchy world financial situation is tantumount to sabotage. Swan had no alternative but to try and debunk the plan until all the i’s and t’s are dotted and crossed.
Julie Bishop. Saying the name says it all.
Wonder if they have ever run an honesty, arrogance, out of touch etc poll on her? That would be interesting, to contrast her and Gillard.
The best thing that could happen to Australian politics would be the resignation of Bishop, Minchin and their kind that would allow Turnbull to pursue the policies he would normally pursue. And Australian politics be fought over more central ground. In fact if he does get a good boost in the polls maybe he like Rudd will take that advantage to force the policies he wants onto the LNP.
Julia Gillard is the featured guest on INSIDERS tomorrow!
I wonder which right wing toads the panel has been stacked with this week?
The last time she was on she told Cassidy to stop acting like a jilted lover.
One of my favourite moments
At the Opera House all night. Got out and up the Gore Hill Fwy a bit and was then surrounded by lots of cars with waving Manly flags sticking out the windows. I had a bad feeling about it. Turned on the ABC News at 11pm to hear the death knell of my $165 (won as funny money off Maxine McKew’s win in Bennelong… had to reinvest). Ruined a perfectly good night of flamenco dancing. The Warriors were paying $3.50. Would have been a tidy win.
What really $hits me is that the first time I considered betting my Monopoly Money stash was on India to win the test they actually won. But couldn’t get to the internet as I was away on a camping holiday. That one would have been $1,500 take home.
I guess this money was never destined to be in my pocket, eh? Still, reinforces the eternal truth about myself: I am no gambler. Never liked pokies, horses or black jack. Gambling and illicit drugs have been two vices that have passed me by, thankfully. If only it wasn’t for the booze and ciggies I’d be a perfect angel.
To make things worse, before the NRL scores were announced, I heard Bishop spouting her errant “I bags Malcolm being the first one think about it” nonsense. Have these people no shame? The world is falling apart, Swan is trying to manage the economy as best he can, without causing a panic in the markets, and all Bishop wants to do is play a stupid game about who thought of what first. I suppose I should look at it analytically and realise that it means they’re insecure, but somehow it still rankles. Couple that with the Raiders wimping out and I was ready to run down the first possum I saw crossing the road on the rest of the way home. Yeah, we did see one, and no, I didn’t run it down. I have standards, unlike some Opposition shadow ministers I could mention.
The good thing is they can’t complain about it now, pretty well whatever happens. And with the enormity of the meltdown this week, it’ll be hard to pin anything on Swan economically. Sub-Prime, September 2008 version, washed all that guff about “Talking up inflation” away, for good this time.
BB
had the rusted on mother in law over
she said the usual fib thoughtbubbles but interestingly went on how rudd was right in going to the us-whilst I was arguing the opposite,she stated that we need to preserve our rating and rudd was only doing what jho would’ve done.
sometimes you just cant take a trick
“Jho”?
For a minute there I thought you meant “Joh”.
This “Prime Tourist” crapola will wash away pretty soon. You could almost hear the collective sigh of relief around the country when the cash injection was announced. Whatever turnbull and Bishop say about this, the credit will go to Labor for actually doing something. I think the punters will realise you don’t organize a $4 billion fillip to the non-bank lenders between Laurie Oakes on Sunday and Tony Jones on Thursday.
The more the Libs try to take the credit, the more they will look like a small party, a little party, greedy, barbarous and cruel. And they’d better not get in the way of the Surplus. It’s REALLY vital now.
Politics and the media … Is it really so hard to understand?
Master’s of the economy, is the main tag when you’re trying to get votes
Rudd, while doing what he thinks is best as PM, also has his eye set firmly on the “yep, I will trust this guy with my readies” vote
Turnbull will do his best to claim the same title. So if the Rudd does well on something fiscal, Turnbull will try to link himself into it. If Rudd does badly, Turnbull will try to belt him for it
Everything that’s happened recently and all the responses fall inside this frame
So what’s the point of discussing the entrails?
Some media reports will slant one way or another, almost every time. A number of commentators are employed purely for such a slant, where’s the catch?
I think the *Australian* gets a HUGE amount of it hits/sales from people who hate them. If every OO hating blogger stopped reading it (online version at least) then clicks (sales) would drop significantly.
Perhaps I’m missing something (I’m sure greater minds will set me straight)
I think you do have a point.
Then again, they don’t need to make a profit, so my reading won’t change that outlook.
I think the *Australian* gets a HUGE amount of it hits/sales from people who hate them.”
not from me , if ‘OO’ is not “reported” on a blog site then I’m none th wiser
When OO is reported on a blog site I’m still none th wiser
Should hav a campaign to deny Uncle rupert ‘left’ contributions , a campaign for ‘left’ supporters called whatever…maybe ‘unclick OO clicks’ , uncle rupert has enough monies
Wayne Swan in normative circumstances would hav been severely criticised for his lack of ’short selling’ consultations seeing he involved principally ASIC but almost left ASX out of loop …bad mistake normally
but given sensitivity of markets in US facing total colllapse at time & effect on ‘oz’ market , Swan (correctly) effectively left ASX out of loop for secrecy sake to actualy protect th oz market from unwanted pre publicity of his plans What Turnbull has done in ‘leaking’ coinfidential info effectively on th 4 billion plan that he must hav got wrongly from a 2nd tier lender or otherwise involved in deal is breach proprity of a’oz’ national intersts in ptotecting th market for his short term gain of alleegedly being his idea some info is sacred & this was a case that Turnbull has tainted iresponsibly
Pat Farmer intimates to Kerry-Anne Walsh of the Sun-Herald that he might quit politics after being deservedly dumped from the front bench last week, which would initiate a very interesting by-election in his seat of Macarthur. He nonetheless says that he has “every intention at this stage” of completing his term.
Very unwelcome to Labor I’d imagine , especialy NSW and a ‘battlers’ seat as well Did not take him long (8 months) to be ‘restless’ in an Opposition non shadow cabinet position
No 325
William on what grounds do you say he “deservedly” lost his front bench position? I note you said a similar thing about Bronny.
For talking this drivel on election night. Anyone with that attitude has no business being in politics.
Ouch
No 328
Sorry William, I don’t see anything there that is remotely offensive or indeed inappropriate for a politician. It appears to be a perfectly normal reaction given the situation.
I suppose you think Howard’s concession speech would have benefited from some variation on “I don’t know what more you have to do to please people”. Shame you didn’t get to write it.
No 331
Point taken. But Pat Farmer isn’t the PM.
Re: William’s link at number 328 …
Pat Farmer is basically complaining about being “unfairly dismissed”. After all the hard work he’d put into the job, too! More than a touch of the right-to-rule mentality there.
Then, in comments (the final comment on the page, by ‘nat’), it becomes clear that Farmer is an unapologetic defender of WorkChoices. One of the central tenets of which was to abolish protection from unfair dismissal for everyone else.
So, on the one hand, he is quite obviously comfortable with Australian employees being dismissed unfairly, and losing pay and conditions. But he cries loudly when dismissed himself (even though he knew the election was likely to bring his “dismissal”, along with the Coalition’s).
He at least had some warning of his impending job loss, a luxury his awful laws denied to other employees, who could be summarily dismissed on the spot, no warning, no reason even needed!
They advocate extreme and unfair workplace laws apply to everyone else .. and mouth off with sour grapes when they lose their own jobs as the electorate shows its displeasure over those same laws.
William’s right. He (they) shouldn’t be anyplace near being able to determine how other people conduct their affairs.
Pat Farmer is a typical Liberal blueblood in the respect he beleives he has a right to rule. These Born to Rule liberals need to realise that they are elected to Parliament to represent the views of the electorate that elected them, not just toe the party line by grovelling at the feet of his messiah JWH. If he is not intelligent enough to realise that JWH and most of his policies were on the nose, then his future as a politician are going to be severely limited. This is what makes his complaints rankle with arrogance and stupidity.
Tom.
Milne weaves a tangled web this morning in the Sunday Tele:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24412237-5001021,00.html
A nice snipe at Turnbull. Then this, in another article:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24411595-5001031,00.html
“Populist politics”, everyone knows that, but that isn’t going to stop Glenn writing about it as if it’s real. It’s all in the perception.
So, is Turnbull ratting on his leader, opposing any policy he was in favour of, or a responsible politician concerned about a wacky, populist and damaging stunt?
Seems if you’re Glenn Milne, you can have it both ways.
Oh, and yes, Rudd is out of touch because he was in New York and hadn’t spoken to Swan for a few hours before he spoke to journalists.
How would Glenn know? And is it true, or even wise… or just vacuuous “populist politics”?
Glenn reports, you decide.
I noticed that the “Editorial” in the Tele had pretty well word for word, some of the Liberal talking sheet rubbish being sprouted by Lib pollies in the media and is everywhere on various blog sites on the net.
I thought this was funny though.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24409257-5001031,00.html
These Liberal party journalists of course cannot stand that the Rudd government is so popular and cruising along so well. It is extreme spite – the Tele’s line is just another meme the the murdoch gang have invented to try and negate Rudd’s overseas success.
By the way, Telegraph fools, you don’t send a foreign minister to meet other government leaders.
They also try to run the one term government meme and the Turnbull is something special and lovable meme and whatever it is they think will harm the government and help the Liberal party. The worst thing about them is they actually have to invent the data/fact on which to base their program. In other words they have to lie through their teeth because the reality is the opposite. You would think murdoch would be embarrassed that his papers produce such trash and yes – are a corruption of democracy. The media being an important part of any successful democracy.
Julia Gillard continues to impress me with her coolness and confidence, illustrated on INSIDERS this morning!
If Pat Farmer retired from Federal Politics early, you might find the constituents of Macarthur take out their anger on the Libs. Farmer hasn’t been living in South Western Sydney for a while, he currently resides in that battler area of Mosman.
Editorials rarely carry any weight because few people read them. Let them do their damndest I say, it hasn’t worked in the past and won’t work now.
I notice The Sunday Morongraph is also criticising a state minister because he dare put his rent up on a property he owns. Is anyone else doing any different? What about the Libs, surely some of them own rental properties and wouldn’t be renting them out for a song.
Pat Farmer is first class, blue blooded sook. I hope he quits so that a marginal seat can be tested at a by election.
my goodness isnt ackerman an embarassment!
On Insiders, Ackerman said that Rudd always turns his back to the opposition when he answers questions. This proves he doesn’t watch question time, because if he did, he would be aware that the opposition complains that Rudd turns his back on THE SPEAKER during answering questions.
The Insiders degrades the program, the ABC, the audience, and the taxpayers of Australia, by featuring the hateful Liberal Party stooge, Piers Akerman, on the show.
I personally don’t mind Mr Akerman supporting the Liberal Party. I’d be worried if I ever agreed with him and it certainly doesn’t do the Liberal Party any favours.
Crabbe and Farr weren’t going to put up with Pies today. They ripped him to pieces almost every time he opened his mouth, for example on the condensate tax issue. It sound like either the others on the panel have agreed to shut him up, or that Pies has been warned to be on his best behavior by the show’s producers.
342 Does Akerman remember a certain John Winston Howard who seemingly perfected that technique?
If Howard (or any Liberal) did or does it, it would be a gesture beyond reproach in the (one) eye of Akerman. If anyone from Labor does it, it is unreservedly despicable. Black and white, good and bad, Liberal and Labor – that’s Piers’ blinkered stance.
Macarthur HA you’re dreaming if you think the Liberals will lose that seat if Pat goes, considering the magnitude of the swing at the 07 election at least half of those protest votes will come back to the Liberals. I’d just about eat my hat if we lost that seat especially with Malcolm Turnbull as Leader.
Pat did have a very strong profile. The new candidate will want to have one or they may lose quite a bit.
Dario if we didnt lose it in 2007 when everything was falling, i cannot see why we’d lose it now.
I’m pretty sure that Turnbull isn’rt in any hurry to find out.
You can bet that he has been on the phone to Farmer to kindly request that he stick it out till the next election.
“isn’t”!
Er, perhaps because Pat Farmer’s profile kept it afloat?
It’s extremely unusual for an incumbent government to win a seat off the opposition at a by-election. No federal Labor government has ever done so. Non-Labor has done it twice (Kalgoorlie 1920, Maranoa 1921). I don’t think Labor would win a by-election anywhere, at any level, in NSW right now, let alone in an opposition-held seat.
Record of federal by-elections during ALP governments:
ALP retained: 15
ALP lost to non-Labor: 7*
ALP lost to independent: 1**
Non-Labor retained: 20
Non-Labor lost to Labor: 0
Independent to Labor: 1***
* Boothby 1911, Grampians 1915, Wide Bay 1915, Parkes 1931, Bass 1975, Adelaide 1988, Canberra 1995
** Wills 1992
** Franklin 1929
The other thing about farmer – to say he is not very bright would be to totally overestimate him.
Have you witnessed him in action at all.
With him living (well) out of his electorate in Mosman if there was a by-election there would have to be some sort backlash.
If there was a by-election in Macarthur now there would be a substantial swing to the Liberals. Why would the place of residence of the *former* member have anything to do with the result? The by-election would be all about “sending Labor a message.”
356
No, it’d be about the 2 or 3 percent of people who got swept up in the excitement of a change of government but no longer feel the same way about Rudd & Co. They’re all over the country. (it says nothing about this particular government and everything about voting patterns in general)
Don’t discount the fact that interest rates dropped for once under Rudd, the insertion of funds into the mortgage industry ($4b) widely touted to cause further downwards pressure on rates, the John Howard factor is gone and the fact that the sky hasn’t fallen in under Labor as was touted by JWH and co. during 2007 election. This may be worth a few percent to Labor as well. If we get another interest rate cut in the next month or two, could make for a very interesting by election.
Tom
Win or lose – if even at least the same swing as from the election is maintained it will be a worrying message to the Liberals, that the nation wide swing at the election has some permanence about it. A loss by the Liberals would put a DD on the backburner again for Rudd, as a threat to the LNP in the Senate, as they won’t be as confident of a ‘correcting’ swing back to the Liberals.
So it would be of benefit for Labor to campaign very hard in that seat if it comes up.
TP, neither 359 or 360 make much sense. There is no conceivable way Labor would win a Macarthur by-election. Labor didn’t even contest Lyne or Mayo, and they might not bother with Macarthur or any other Coalition held seat either. Why volunteer for a defeat and give the Libs a boost?
I doubt Labor would win Macarthur at a by-election. If they didn’t win it at the last election I find it hard to imagine they’d win it now when it bears no outcome on a change to government. I’d imagine Labor would still field a candidate in the seat but there’d be a quite substantial swing against them I’d imagine. Then again there have been some by-elections that have defied this in the past, for instance one or two by-elections in WA actually swung heavily towards Labor in the past term from memory, which more reflected the poor performance of the state opposition at the time. I don’t think the federal Opposition are performing that badly in comparison.
I doubt Labor would bother in Macarthur, why spend good money on a meaningless by-election? What have they to gain by winning the seat?
Well if you’re looking at it from one perspective they ought to field a candidate because they should offer the people of Macarthur a genuine alternative.
Labor couldn’t win either way: either they get mocked for chickening out of a contest in a 0.7 per cent seat, or they cop a swing. If I were the Libs I’d be nudging Farmer out the door, for more reasons than one.
LTEP, WA Labor picked up a 1 per cent swing at the Peel by-election in February 2007. The only other contested by-election last term was Victoria Park (vacated by Geoff Gallop), where there was a swing of about 4 per cent to the Liberals.
They I assume will do some polling there. It is a benefit if there are indications that they can be competitive. And if they can maintain the same margins then there is a message in that too for the Liberal party, that may make them a little uncertain about the nature of the last election. Was it just getting rid of Howard or is it a more permanent shift in peoples attitudes. Strategically it is worth it if a close result can be achieved.
It’s not out of the question that Labor could win in Macarthur… they didn’t do so badly in the recent council elections in Campbelltown / Liverpool compared to elsewhere, and Pat Farmer may have annoyed his constituents with his whinging. On the other hand, the new Liberal guy won’t be Farmer, and Labor probably can’t do that much better than the 10% swing they already got. It’ll be interesting, though… the first by-election that doesn’t involve a senior minister in the last government (unlike Gippsland / Lyne / Mayo). Labor might not win, but they’d be fools to sit this one out.
By the way. According to Wiki, Ben Raue (who I’ve seen post here sometimes) was the Greens candidate for the seat at the last election. You around, Ben?
By-elections are fought on local issues, why buy into a shit fight? Howard never did. In the extremely unlikely event that Labor wins – so what. Another backbencher in a Govt with a comfortable majority.
Leave it ’till the next general election. When Federal issues are paramount. Then win it.
By-election swings don’t necessarily tell us anything about who will win the next election. Sometimes they do (Bass 1975, Canberra 1995), but sometimes they don’t (Adelaide 1988, Ryan 2001). I think Labor would be clobbered at any by-election in NSW at the moment, but I doubt that would mean anything in terms of how NSW seats will go in 2010.
fair enough then – but if there is a chance they should run with it. It will be interesting to see how much of that 10% sticks.
Macarthur 0.7%
I would expect with increasing cost of living and the condition of the NSW State Government would see the Liberal Party hold the seat! the Liberals could rub it right in by preselecting the Nurse whom they had run in the Macquarrie Fields by-election.
The above list from Adam listing the seats that have changed was somewhat Interesting, the thing I note is most of the seats that changes were or I image them to be rural seats, I’m not sure if I’m reading Adams list correctly.
I’m not sure if Adam has made a typo but are you of the view that the ALP could lose the seats of Auburn and Cabamatta!
There’s no pattern in the seats Labor has lost at by-elections. Some were rural (Wide Bay) some were urban (Adelaide). It’s mainly a matter of chance. If a by-election happens when a government is unpopular, it will be lost. If they don’t want to elect a Lib, they’ll vote for an independent (Wills) or a Green (Cunningham).
I haven’t seen anything on the upcoming NSW state by-elections, but I think would Labor is in grave danger of losing all of them, including Cabramatta – not necessarily to a Liberal, but certainly to someone. Labor lost Bass Hill in similar circs in 1988. I don’t know who is running. A local indentity running as an independent perhaps?
The sample size is a little too small to make any sort of real analysis
Can someone shed some light on the Dixon by-election in 1993 (shortly after the Federal election)? I would’ve expected there would’ve been a fairly good chance Labor could’ve lost that seat at the by-election… but obviously not… was there a factor at play there (e.g. Liberal not running a candidate)?
Federal Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull says the Government has Coalition support for a plan to boost the mortgage market.
The Government is making $4 billion available to lenders in exchange for high-quality mortgages.
The global turmoil has shut down the market that non bank lenders relied upon to fund their loans.
Mr Turnbull says he is pleased by Treasurer Wayne Swan’s decision to adopt what was an Opposition proposal.
“He has bi-partisan support on that,” he said.
“Naturally we’ll want to work through the details and see how it will operate, see how effective it will be but we look forward to working with the Government on that.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/28/2376286.htm?section=justin
Yet again we have the “Labor pinches economic guru’s policy”. Liars. I eventually watched Q&A today, and Talcum revised what he said to Oakes.
He is a fraud.
LTEP, that wasn’t actually a by-election: it was a supplementary election held a month after the election proper because a candidate died between the closure of nominations and polling day. Michael Lavarch ended up retaining the seat very narrowly for Labor after a swing of 2.9 per cent to Liberal candidate Bruce Flegg, later to re-emerge as state Liberal leader.
Next time Labor is accused of “doing nothing to put downward pressure on interest rates” they can point to the $4 billion cash injection as a concrete measure which, if rates do go down, actually, and measurably worked.
All this argey-bargey about who thought of it first coming from the Opposition is clearly petty-minded. While Bishop plays “Finders Keepers, Losers Weepers” with what is almost literally an economy-saving measure, and “thinks about” agreeing with it (whatever that means… the measure is legislated already) Labor gets on with the job, unable to afford to indulge in churlish gamesmanship. It’s a pretty picture.
With the pressure mounting on Fielding, even now from his own side, he would be a brave man to continue blocking the Surplus if it got in the way of a $4 billion measure to help working families in favour of Porsche and luxury 4WD drivers, and/or young female binge drinkers and tradies hooked on alcopops and Bundy Cokes.
It’s a potential meltdown for the Opposition.
Turnbull’s is an old corporate management trick – steal credit for the work and intelligence of others and make it appear your own in order to promote yourself. It is what you do when you have no abilities or work of your own.
Labor should state it exactly like that. Mr Turnbull should answer his own exam questions rather than cheat by looking over the shoulder of others.
“Naturally we’ll want to work through the details and see how it will operate, see how effective it will be but we look forward to working with the Government on that.”
Reply to Talcum – Naff Off, you are the Opposition, remember the people rejected your mob last Nov. Get out of the way, we will do what we are elected to do.
Get your own house in order, sack Abbott and Minchin – do you have the stones to do it?
It’s very easy to disparage oppositions for being irrelevant. They did it to us, we do it to them. Ho hum. Oppositions are by definition irrelevant, but let’s beware of the same hubris that did for Howard. Demos is tossing and turning in his sleep, and we won’t know who has been whispering in his ear until he wakes up in 2010.
It looks that way, Thomas. Separately tell a hundred people they’ll win money on the horses if they trial your form analysis software, and half a dozen of them will win. They’ll think you’re a genius and buy the the full version. It’s a reliable old scam exposed on The Investigators years ago, several times.
Put out enough ideas and one of them is bound to be right. It’s up to the spin doctors to make sure the punters only remember the correct predictions, and forget the wrong ones. When (inevitably) the chumps start losing, the scammers (if they can be found) always claim, “You didn’t follow the instructions to the letter.”
Turnbull is effectively saying, “Well, my first idea worked, and I’m prepared to sell you my ‘Fix The Economy’ software, but there are conditions.” Imagining, for a moment, that the government would be stupid enough to go all gooey and bi-partisan with him, every time something failed, or even didn’t work as well as expected, Turnbull would be out there bull-roaring, “They didn’t do it to the letter of what I told them to do.” It’s the classic scammer’s “out”.
Turnbull’s original suggestion was made in the context of massive bailouts of totally bankrupt companies by President Bush. At the time he made it to suggest, imply or even open to interpretation that Australia needed the same thing with its major institutions would have caused a local market meltdown. Swan had no choice but to go in hard and classify Turnbull’s comments as unhelpful, or even dangerous. Thinking out loud, and bizoid merchant bank brainstorming are no substitute for taking responsibility for running the economy. I doubt whether anyone will really believe Swan only did what he did after Turnbull first put the idea in his head. Swan has a right to run the economy without this kind of interference and sideline kibbitzing from someone who has no responsibility if the idea fails.
Bushfire Bill, the luxury car tax increase has already passed. The Government, do however, face rocky times ahead with both the so-called ‘alcopops’ tax and the Fuelwatch scheme in the Senate. It’ll also be interesting to see what happens with the revided Medicare Levy surcharge thresholds bill and, eventually, the pharmaceutical cost recovery bill (I suspect both will pass, with the thresholds bill meeting resistance from the Opposition).
Trying to enact legislation for the so-called Carbon Pollution Reduction scheme will be a nightmare I’d imagine, particularly if Fielding continues his position of negativing a bill on the first second reading and agreeing to it, with changes that could’ve been asked for at the first occasion, on a second occasion.
Oppositions are not irrelevant. They are the alternative Govt. When the current mob start acting like an alternative they will no longer be irrelevant.
Sadly at the moment they are totally irrelevant, they just have not realised it yet.
I had chance to hear Gillard on the wireless this morning and I note that commentators were being a little mischievous in saying how good she was at being PM.
Julia said that she enjoyed and I am sure she did – it looked like it.
But I guess it is good for Labor’s future that there is some talent in the wings capable of effectively taking the reins. I do remember Bolt lamenting this very fact before the election when he said something like ‘have you seent the talent in the Labor party?’
Thus proving what an ignorant jerkoff Bolt is and always has been.
Swanny should come out with something like – Mr Turnbull ought to realise that cheating someone’s elses and claiming it as your own is not the same as having your own ideas. It is the thing lacking in with Labor (and Obama for that matter) the quick reveal all phrase that doesn’t require people to pay attention for a minute or two.
We know Talcum does not stand up for the things he believes are correct, Kyoto, Apology, Fuel Excise, Pensions to name a few.
This will become a critical flaw and he will be relegated to the waste pile of politics. He stands for nothing, you do not become PM just because you want to.
What governing parties mean when they call on the opposition to “act responsibly” is “agree with us and don’t make trouble.” No opposition ever won an election following that advice. “The first duty of an opposition is to oppose” (Churchill, I think). Turnbull knows that. His path to the next election is to make life as difficult as possible for Labor, using the Senate and any other ammunition that comes to hand. Whether his positions are logical or not doesn’t matter very much this year or next. It is an old Labor saying: “When you want to hit a dog, any stick will do.” Only in 2010 will he need to come up with something positive.
NSW Health figures reveal 40,000 people are admitted to state hospitals each year for alcohol-related injuries and illnesses, Fairfax reported
The figures show young women aged 18 to 24 recorded the greatest increase in alcohol-related hospital admissions.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24414620-12377,00.html
Alcopops legislation passed with some kind of advertising restriction coming up folks.
Adam
Talcum will NOT be opposition leader in 2010.
Uh-huh. Who will?
I stand corrected on the LCT, thanks to Itep. Silly of me.
The point I was trying to make is that the measures these guys are opposing are assumed to be unpopular. That’s their meme, and the media obligingly prints that narrative verbatim.
But every time a poll is taken on these issues, the reverse is proved to be the case (e.g. the recent Newspoll on alcopops). I’d suggest its the same situation on “The Prime Tourist” and even the pensions issue: battlers out there want that Surplus as big as possible. They’ve bought the “Big Surplus = Economic Buffer” line, and don’t want their homes threatened by ideological objections from a reckless Opposition. We forget that the likes of Fielding and Xenophon only scored a tiny percentage of votes, and for a good reason: the voters don’t like them very much. This is the flaw in all the “Oncer” stories we read… these guys are despised by the general electorate, and I’d reckon most of their antics are similarly despised.
Ru
I beg to differ
Talcum is there come hell or high water
(any good takeover involves hands on running)
Bushfire Bill, who commissioned the Newspoll on alcopops?
Anyone who thinks the “Anyone but Turnbull” faction of the Liberal Party is about to roll over and play dead has rocks in their head.
The white anting of his leadership has begun already, Milne’s piece about him opposing the pension stuff is the latest example. (Denied by Talcum – but damage done). Someone leaked it to the Dwarf.
Who will lead? There are heaps with the baton in their knapsack. Nelson, Bishop, Hockey, Abbott to name a few.
Talcum was forced into the leadership – he did not seek it, or want it at this time. He is the next for the chop.
They have no other than Turnbull and, unless he starts the Republican debate and calls Workchoices type IR totally dead, he will be there at the end. Brendan is probably planning his return hoping to be a Bradbury.
Yes – should never under estimate the nastiness of the hard right.
Ru
Talcum is basically aiming to reform from the top without scaring the gee gees
The howard faction is being slowly denied oxygen and proof positive is the fact that half the old cabinet is gone with from memory only a few offenders left.
whilst not convinced the fibs are a chance come 2010,talcum has the big chance to reform whilst the mandate is fresh
Farmer wont be the last to be pushed out IMHO
I think you guys might be misjudging the Liberals. They would do anything to win, even if that means falling in behind a leader they find unpalatable. If they think Malcolm is the man who might have a chance of getting them back into power, then they will keep him in the job. Indeed, if they thought he gives them a whiff of a chance they would refuse to let him go!
Remember Costello’s observation:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/peter-hartcher/a-long-conversation-about-no-one/2008/09/11/1220857737344.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Cossie is a bit of a goose, and no leader himself. But what he says seems correct: look at the messiah treatment dished up to the feet of Howard.
A Liberal PM yes, but a Liberal Opposition Leader has no such support, as proven by the frequent turnover during the Hawke/Keating era
Not to mention many state parliaments which have seen a veritable revolving door of party leaders.
Adam,
Re the appropriate attitude of oppositions:
I’m sure that you’re familiar with Curtin’s address to Parliament, when Menzies was urging a national (all-party) government to prosecute the war effort, after the 1940 election, and its knife-edge result. Curtin’s magnificent speech, opposing the idea, in which he struck the appropriate note of compromise between opposition and support:
“the obligations of my (Curtin’s) office….shall be conducted …(so) that it will be free from anything but reasonable, honorable and straightforward criticism and opposition….
“I accept …(the electorate’s)…decision and shall do my best to have carried out by the government as much as possible of the programme in which I believe. I shall not permit myself to do anything that would jeopardise the free parliamentary system of this country, which is the chief instrument of the freedom that we are striving to preserve.”
Paul Hasluck (imho justly) characterised this speech as a classic statement of parliamentary government in Australia.
Adam @ #373
“Labor lost Bass Hill in similar circs in 1988″
There have been changes to NSW electoral laws since 1988 which prevent a repeat of the Bass Hill by-election circumstances.
At the Bass Hill by-election, the Liberal Party obtained an injunction to prevent the ALP from handing out their HTV card because it was missing the line “Printed by….”.
The ALP were unable to use their HTVs for 1.5 to 2 hours while they stamped “Printed by….” on each HTV.
The relevant changes since 1988 are:
Candidates’ Political Party affiliation is now printed on the ballot paper.
All election material, including HTVs, must be approved by the electoral commission in advance.
Peter: Yes, but that didn’t stop Curtin, even in wartime, voting against Fadden’s 1941 budget, and, with the support of Coles and Wilson, bringing down the government.
Barry: That may have cost Labor some votes, but the main reason Labor lost Bass Hill was because Unsworth’s government was in such bad odour. Unsworth nearly failed to win Rockdale on the same day.
Goodness, Ackerman is intolerable on Insiders.
If anyone ever wondered how Howie won three elections, perhaps this will help. Without putting too fine a point on it LOTS OF AUSTRALIANS ARE RACISTS.No prizes for guessing which group was mentioned most frequently.
40pc believe others don’t belong here
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24415273-5005962,00.html
Did he bring up Heiner again?
Still watching the rerun on the ABC website.
The difference between a cane toad and ackerman?
Lipstick.
Someone did say that he still brings up Heiner on his blog.
Well he got through Insiders without mentioning Heiner. Astonishing.
He’s much too partisan for my liking.
“The difference between a cane toad and ackerman?”
I’ll have to get back to you on that one. Possibly cane toads have higher ethical standards.
Anyone who is too partisan for GP’s liking must be falling off the edge of the scale.
If this actually gets taken up it will be a big plus for the government
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24414698-421,00.html
Mr Akerman is intolerable “period”!
If Akerman is an “insider”, the question must be: inside what??
Alimentary my dear cuppa , alimentary
LOL Gus!
A pantry
No way! He’s hilarious.
I’d hate to see him go…
I thought you were referring to Christopher Pearson for a minute then.
But that would’ve only made sense if you wrote “closet”.
Pearson is not a closet queen, he has said on the record he is gay.
He has also said that sexuality is fluid; so maybe he will jump back in the closet and turn non-gay.
[He has also said that sexuality is fluid] That was no pun?
GP @ 411:
There’s hope for you yet, GP.
For your next exercise please repeat, “Rudd has won this week in politics,” one hundred times.
Pies was very quiet today. I think he’s been read the riot act (it’s hard to imagine any self-censorship going on). He only tried to bring up one wacky theory: that the condensate tax would completely cut off foreign investment in Australia. But that was howled down by Farr and Crabbe who pointed out that condensate and Woodside had enjoyed a tax holiday for (to quote a scowling Farr): “THIRTY…… ONE YEARS, Piers.”
After that we hardly heard a peep out of the Large One in the fat chair. Quite refreshing.
Not 21, 31 years is what I heard said, just for emphasis.
Well that is $3bn Rudd has saved I gather the other $1bn on advertising not donated to supporting media.
No 425
No, Rudd did not win the week.
Latest news on Mosman’s finest, Pat Farmer:
That sounds like a tacit goodbye
Good article by Gittins:
http://business.smh.com.au/business/ideology-our-guard-against-opportunism-20080928-4ppi.html?page=2
William the Curious Snail has a Galaxy Federal Poll here.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24414918-953,00.html
Interesting conclusion to a Paul Sheehan article on how Turnbull white-anted Nelson, in the SMH:
Coorey still on about the Prime Tourist and other assorted ancient history…
Trite? A Fairfax gallery reporter? Tell me it ain’t so!
I would have thought a successful election a year ago demonstrated a little warmth from the electorate in Labor’s direction. An election that got rid of the genius, invincible politicians Howard, Costello, Downer, Vaile, has seen off one Opposition Leader, Nelson, and which sees the winner of that election still ahead in the polls by a record amount would evidence some success by Rudd and his gang of bumbling home renovators. But no, Kevin-747’s still floundering around.
And yes, Coorey nominates yet another “test”…
Actually it’s an ongoing project, going ahead in tranches, as was always the plan. Apart from a recent choke by NSW, hundreds of schools already have their computers. And the first Lib premier “since the stone age” is going to “test” Rudd? Who’d have guessed that?
Its a bit odd that the Curious Snail could not bring itself to mention a TPP swing to Labor, since the election, in Qld.
Has Milne sniffed the wind and realized the old Turnbull narrative of “Swan is talking down the economy, while talking up inflation” is over?
Would that be a concrete measure to “put downward pressure on interest rates” perhaps?
Gee, but what about Glenn’s column (just yesterdayweek wasn’t it?… in the Telegraph?) about the “Prime Tourist” not having a clue about the impact of the global financial crisis on Australia? Writing on on of Rudd’s responses to a journalist in Nw York, Glenn intoned,
…but Milne’s message is clear: Chapter 1 of The Rudd Era is over.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24415571-33435,00.html
#434 – Swannie is proving the so called weak-link is turning out to be the strongest welded joint, no stress fracture here. The ugly duckling is flying high like a swan.
Why, you’re a poet, Fins!
In my last post I wrote that Milne’s critical article on the trip was “yesterday week”. Error! It was actually yesterday. The little bugger’s completely changed his tack in the space of 24 hours, turning Rudd’s trips overseas from “not having a clue” about the local ramifications of the global economic crisis into a series of masterstrokes of pre-emptive planning and information gathering.
Something’s up (besides Glenn being up himself, that is).
It is isn’t it. Malcolm is the saviour! Oh, but not the Liberals…
Maybe Paul Kelly gave him a swift don’t argue for being such a dill
I think the worry for the more right wing of the Liberal Party is that as and if Turnbull becomes more popular he attains more leverage to weed more of them out and drop more of their ideology from policy. This might bring those white ants out, such as Costello and Milne (if he is one) and so forth.
Actually, what I was wondering was whether Murdoch has a hand in this, after the meeting in NY with Rudd. Milne’s reversal is 180 degrees in 24 hours. He even used the word “judgement” about Labor in nice way for once. Kelly was calling for “two cheers” for Rudd on Saturday. Only Shanahan was still waffling on about wadting taxpayers’ money in his audio piece (no written backup).
I reckon you hit the nail on the head BB 440, old Rupey has told them to U-turn.
Michelle Grattan demonstrates why she is so respected by the political class:
Shorter La Stupenda: “Turnbull is more popular than Nelson and the Senate could be a serious block… or not.”
Do they blush when they pick up their pay cheques?
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/bringing-the-world-home/2008/09/27/1222217582515.html
If you toss a coin it could come up heads… or tails
More like, “Heads I win, tails you lose.”
A pretty vacuous piece, but Grattan is not the worst offender. I recall from the days when I used to read the Murdoch press that they are much worse. The fact is that we have far too much political commentary in our media, and they struggle to find something suitably portentious to say every day. If they don’t have anything to go with, they just make it up.
I think Milne’s 24-hour, 180 degree switcheroo on the wisdom of Rudd’s trip has to take the cake, from plonking contempt to portentious praise overnight. Nevertheless, to me it potentially signals what Glenn would call “a paradigm shift” in media emphasis.
The “Tourist PM” and “Swan stole my homework” angles have just about disappeared in seas of irrelevance and bi-partisanship respectively, today.
Coorey’s “Rudd didn’t even turn up for the GF breakfast” will sink without trace.
Pies’ “Taxing condensate will wreck foreign investment” was smacked down before he even got it all out on Insiders.
The “unpopular alcopops” meme is long dead (thanks to that Newspoll).
What’s left? “Rudd hates pensioners”, and maybe “Rudd hates private health insurance”.
There’s a bin marked “Sub-Prime Meltdown” and every economic skyrocket the Opps send Labor’s way will disappear into it.
A good week.
I know this is the federal thread, but can I just say that Mike Rann is a ****
http://news.smh.com.au/world/gangs-should-be-seen-as-terrorists-rann-20080929-4q12.html
18 weeks paid maternity/paternity leave recommended by the Productivity Commission in it’s interim report, as well as scrapping the Baby Bonus
http://news.smh.com.au/national/commission-proposes-18week-parent-leave-20080929-4ptp.html
Uncle Rupert had a good meeting with Rudd in NY last week, and afterwards he had a chat with the editors of The OZ & asked them to go easier on Labor?
I nearly fell out of my chair when I read the Poisoned Dwarf’s latest opinion piece this morning.
Dario: Rann is presumably going down the populist route to revive his poll ratings!
He once had approval ratings of 70%.
New thread.