The first post-budget poll is an ACNielsen survey of 1400 respondents, and it’s given Labor its second weakest poll result since the election of the Rudd government. The first was the same outfit’s 52-48 result from September last year. ACNielsen’s previous survey in March had Labor’s lead at 58-42. The poll finds that:
• Labor’s primary vote is down three points since March to 44 per cent, while the Coalition is up six to 43 per cent.
• The Coalition has opened up a most unlikely sounding five point primary vote lead in Victoria, after trailing by 20 per cent in March.
• Kevin Rudd’s lead as preferred prime minister is down from 69-24 to 64-28.
• Rudd’s approval rating is down 10 points to 64 per cent, and his disapproval is up 10 to 32 per cent. Turnbull’s ratings are unchanged at 43 per cent and 47 per cent.
• While 56 per cent believe the budget to have been fair, only 40 per cent support the budget’s phased increase in the age of pension eligibility from 65 to 67, and 38 per cent say the budget will make them worse off personally. Twenty-three per cent say it will make them better off.
The print edition will presumably feature a full chart with none-too-reliable state breakdowns.
UPDATE: No such budget narrowing from Essential Research, which has Labor’s two-party lead up from 61-39 to 62-38. However, Kevin Rudd’s approval rating is down nine points from three weeks ago to 61 per cent, while his disapproval is up eight to 29 per cent. Turnbull is respectively up two to 30 per cent and up one to 49 per cent. Interestingly, fewer people found the budget bad for them personally than had expected to beforehand. Twenty-five per cent say it will make them more likely to vote Coalition against 22 per cent Labor. Peter Brent has ACNielsen’s state, area, gender and age breakdowns here.
717 Comments
Rudd was right, it is a tough budget with unpopular measures.
The link doesn’t work William.
Wow, the narrowing. Pretty well back to the election result. Glen and GP WILL be pleased.
The only problem is, when compared with the ER 61-39 and the previous AC Neilsen of 58-42, it looks a bit out of place.
BTW William, the link you provided doesn’t work.
884 on the thread before last (where I had typed this up but the comments closed before i could submit it)
On a population basis China would have most power followed by India (Labor position)
On a GDP basis the USA would have the most power followed by Japan (Liberal position)
On a land area basis the Russians would have the most power followed by the Canadians (the Nationals` position except for Russia having the most power).
Scorpio i wont accept this figure unless it is repeated by other polls (newspoll/galaxy) until that day it means very little to me.
Boerwar 874 (old thread), North Melbourne Kangaroos, Dockers travelling to Melbourne next week.
Essential – 61 – 39
Morgan 60 – 40
Neilsen 53 – 47
Agree Scorpio
William
The hot link in your header para is not working.
It wasn’t a link – I just pasted the URL in as a holdover until I wrote my post, which is now up.
This does seem oddly low; I really didn’t think the budget was that harsh on the vast majority of voters. The main losers were in the top 10% of income distributions (or even smaller).
Boerwar
Re previous thread, yes that is the point. We are not a superpower, and international agreements might be easier to get if we just tried to be credible, rather than influential. Credibility leads to influence.
Well at least the Lions won. Night all.
Let’s see Newspoll and Essential Research befor writing off this poll. Glem makes a good point though.
I note that Grattan says the government would be having second thoughts on a DD. Actually I don’t think this poll would do that. If Labor got a primary vote of 44% they would win the election easily.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498176-601,00.html
Good old “Greens strategists” getting excited after a positive result. I don’t see how talking up your chances does you any good.
Labor would only struggle to win an election if their primary vote just 40%
The Tory pv needs to be 45% at least if not higher to win…
Nielsen was post-budget though, the others were all pre-budget.
I think most people were expecting a swing against the government after the budget but I think this one is a bit much and Newspoll will be less.
When you look at the figures on the reaction to the Budget, it shows that then people polled really don’t understand it and are just reacting to the pollster as though they do.
I think Michelle Grattan is drawing a very long bow with this statement though.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/rudds-popularity-dives-over-new-pension-age-20090517-b7d2.html?page=-1
I would agree with Glen. I would have thought that the pecentage of Green preferences flowing to teh Liberals was getting even smaller with no change in turnbull’s cliamte change position. So even if the Green vote is up at Labor’s expense, , that doesn’t mean the coalition would win.
OK really off to sleep this time
The Oppositions probably going to see this as vindication of their “Debt and deficit” strategy, which is not only stupid, but bad for the country as Brian Toohey and George Megalogenis were pointing out on Insiders.
This article is a bit of a teaser and not as clear as Michelle normally is.
We don’t have enough information here to work out what is going on but there is something peculiar about this.
It is unlikely that it is Turnbull’s Battlers, the ones who were the big budger losers in the budget, who have switched here – they were most likely in the bag for Turnbull already.
These figures, unless they are an outlier are not about Turnbull. The fact that neither Turnbull’s satisfaction nor dissatisfaction ratings have altered tends to support this view.
A change of 25% from March in Victoria does not seem credible.
Looks like I am going to have to retract on a discussion in a previous thread – I was arguing that the pension age decision should have been brought forward and that as it was it was not a decision. Well, maybe the decision wasn’t tough but the consequences may be tough. It looks like the Aussies treasure their grey nomad days. Grattan mentions the word ’surprise’. Perhaps it was too important a policy shift to be introduced without public consultation?
If the voters broke from Rudd but did not go to Turnbull, does this mean that the Greens have picked up what Labor has shed? Not enough info here, either.
Still, much more interesting that the boring old 60/40 split of the last couple of months.
William
Thank you.
Julium
You poor, poor thing.
When you compare this poll with all the others over the past two months, then this just doesn’t fit. There seems to be something strange about this poll. Nothing similar seems to have happened to any other poll.
Juliem
I would recommend a Football Fan Despair Workshop…
Well at lot of people who are about to approach retirement age would’ve been Teenagers or young adults during the late 60s/Veitnam War Era who would’ve been Left Wing ALP types, but would now be more at home in the Greens.
Turnbull’s going to pass alcopops and Treasury analysis backs up what some of us were saying about an increase in cigarette tax vs. keeping medicare rebate – it will blow a $3.2 billion hole in the budget over the next decade.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/opposition-will-support-alcopop-tax-increase-20090517-b7el.html
Tony Wright must have been looking over Michelle’s shoulder while she was typing her piece. Although he added a bit more strange conjecture with some blatant truths.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/for-turnbull-just-a-whiff-of-that-intoxicating-aroma-20090517-b7db.html
Scorpio
What fun it must be to be a journo! I wonder what Wright’s definition of a ‘trend’ is?
BTW – is your catchment on the inland side of the great divide?
Anothery bites the dust. Great Southern. Perhaps $4 billion gone.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498179-601,00.html
Congrats to Diogenese, whose back of a cigarette packet calculations were far superior to those of Turnbull.
You heard it first on Pollbludger. Treasury has now confirmed Diogenese’es calculations that Turnbull had badly underestimated the gains from his Tobacco thing.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498175-601,00.html
An encouraging, but meaningless, result unless there is a demonstrated trend in the other published polls.
A five point lead on primaries in Vic? Wow Rudd must have had some special tax just for them?
The pensioners will always be
under the Coalition
The journos just cannot help wetting themselves under the Coalition.
Jeez, what is going on here.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498143-2702,00.html
The opposition supports the increase to the pension age. Once that fact sinks in there should a move back to the government.
I like it. Anything that keeps the Coalition thinking that it just has to keep doing what it’s doing and keeps it away from deeper analysis, is fine by me.
MT will think his brilliant 3 cents a ciggie tax has been a circuit breaker, just as BN thought his 5 cents reduction in the price of fuel was.
BTW, the above shows how lacking in clear direction the Coalition is – they can advocate a tax cut at one budget and a tax rise at the next.
Castle, i wouldn’t worry too much a public muttering from one analyst that was published in the OZ. It’s the unseen that is more important.
As SUN TZU said in “THE ART OF WAR” : Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near.
It’s hard to get all that excited about one poll, when all the others are showing 60-40 or thereabouts.
I suspect the SMH line on this is born more from a desire to write about something (anything) than anybody seriously thinking this is the beginning of the end for Rudd.
If Newspoll doesn’t show a similar swing back to the Coalition, we’ll have to dismiss Nielsen as a dud poll.
Of course the MSM are wetting themselves this morning at the thought of a Liberal revival, particularly that toad Alan Jones and his radio station.
Peter Hartcher must have written his SMH column in a state of mass excitement, he argued a week ago that Rudd was TOO popular.
I haven’t been able to trust an AC Neilson poll since their election eve shocker in 2007.
This one is hard to believe without the wider context of similar trends in other polls.
Very impressed to see GP and Glen not getting overly excited about it.
I’m with Zoomster- anything that gets the opposition to think they’re back in the game and thus not change anything is great news for the government
As for the Toad, as long as he trumpets the polls shifting back to the government with equal vigour that’s OK. What? He wont do that??
Andrew: 2GB in Sydney should be renamed “Radio Liberal Party”, Jones/Ray Hadley/Chris Smith/Jason Morrison all card carrying members of the Libs.
No wonder Rudd and his ministers prefer 2UE/ABC/FM radio.
Whether this is a real shift or not. I find it incredible that after getting egg on their face time after time since Rudd became leader about the honeymoon ending and the narrowing, the MSM still parrot the same stuff. Then, don’t acknowledge with the same emphasis when the polls widen again.
And ,after all, this is a WORSE result than the last election any way. Michelle Grattan has been very disappointing of late and her Shanahanesque take on this poll continues the trend? Scotch thoughts of any early poll? Please
Must admit I have been impressed by the Liberal supporters here not jumping to melo dramatic conclusions about this poll despite any inner desire to sing hallelujah. Trends are important and getting excited about one (possibly) aberrant poll would only lead to tears.
Clearly, this poll is out of sync with the prevailing orthodoxy so I’ll be looking to the next round of polls to ascertain if anything has changed.
From talking to people over the weekend, concern about the level of debt seems to be an issue for people. Also, I noticed that crowds at the regular watering holes seem down, especially among the younger crowd. Maybe the recession is starting to bite!
Do others have any similar anecdotes?
Where is the headline about Turnbull supporting the change to aged pensions? Kept that one very quiet our dear MSM
GG, the debt worry certainly has some resonance particuarly being attached to Labor. The opposition however has failed to show how they would do things any differently in the context of a global recession
Hopefully this is no more than an outlier. A six-point shift in primaries does seem unrealistic. However, maybe it’s time for the government to consider talking about WorkChoices again, and the Coalition’s agenda to undermine the conditions and living standard of Australian employees. They might also advise people that Turnbull let slip their agenda to privatise / abolish Medicare.
This highlights the point I made somewhere else sometime against the purists that Labor’s poll lead should not be assumed and that they should take a DD while their advantage still existed, if offered the chance.
If this poll is born out by others then the DD will now feel too risky.
But will the Coalition get suckered and on the basis of this one poll and block the Alcopop tax?
Boerwar,
Yes, we aren’t travelling so well this year
…….
TP,
thought MT caved in on that FR of last week?
I think that the governments communication about the reasons for going into deficit and stimulating the economy have been hijacked by the amount of Liberals going on TV to wage a scare campaign about said deficit. It’s very frustrating to see the government ministers sit next to someone and let them spin this lie and not say anything.
More communication, whether it’s a small ad campaign explaining to people the reason for the budget measures and stimpacks.
Get someone as well as Swan to explain in simple terms, if they didn’t stimulate the economy where we would be now.
More Julia and Lindsay – great communicators
People are saying that they need to communciate the reasons why and are failing and that might be starting to show through on the polling. Still not sure if this is a trend or a one off low poll.
Message to Labor DO NOT let the Liberal party lie about the governments around the world, need to go into deficit in order to stop a depression. If Labor do then they’d deserve to take a hit at the polls.
As long as they’re not using taxpayer money to do so.
No. He said they’ll have a look at the Alcopops tax again. That leaves them wriggle room to determine their position on it up until the actual vote. I imagine they’ll just let it through though. There’s little point providing the Government with a trigger.
Why not use taxpayers money, it’s giving info to the taxpayer. This argument that the government shouldn’t use money to inform the community is getting ridiculous. Now the papers are saying that they shouldn’t travel to improve Australia’s positions in the world.
That’s why I read and occassionaly post here – I have no confidence in most of the MSM (parrots repeating what other parrots have said) and those that have some credibility are still not as reliable as Crikey, Possumn and Poll Bludgers.
I couldn’t agree more with Dogma. However it’s also do to with an underlying doubt that the Liberals exploit about the Labor Party’s inability to run the economy. This is a hangover from the Keating era. This is akin to the Hanson “being overrun by Asians” spiel. It exploits fear and ignorance in some people . This is why I find the whole Turnbull- led agenda so morally repugnant. The major economies around the world are in serious trouble and all he can offer is “lower deficit” under Liberals. He hasn’t come out with ANY alternative. It’s the very system of economics that they espouse that has led to this meltdown : Middle class welfare, little infrastructure spending, erosion of industrial relations etc. The U.S. version of capitalism is one sick puppy . Guy Rundle’s analysis on Q&A was spot on. My message to Rudd would be : keep asking the Liberals –” What is the alternative , a longer and deeper recession ?”
Boerwar @ 27,
The catchment that feeds to where I live is the Fitzroy, the second largest in Australia.
McMullan says Nielsen poll may have been flawed
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25499167-12377,00.html
I’d like to point out that my figures on this were far from perfect as I did not know how quickly people would cut consumption after the excise rise on cigs. I overestimated how quickly they would drop, so my revenue figures were a bit under in the short term but in the long-term showed a drop in revenue like Treasury. Turnbull was pretty dumb not to see that coming, especially as it was the only figure he came up with in his Budget reply. Abetz isn’t taking it too well.
http://livenews.com.au/rss-link/labor-using-treasury-to-attack-oppositions-tobacco-tax-proposal-abetz/2009/5/18/206874
‘Giving information to the taxpayer’ is the oldest spin in the book when it comes to Government advertising campaigns. I recall the Howard Government claimed the WorkChoices ads were necessary to provide the correct ‘information’ to the public on the new laws.
In reality often ‘information campaigns’ are pushing political messages that political parties should pay for themselves. The public don’t need to be informed there is a deficit, that information has been provided for free readily by the media.
If you’re suggesting the Government should use taxpayer money to explain to us that deficit and debt are not bad (a political message) I will have to disagree with you.
We’ll soon find out. Newspoll is out tonight.
They manage to damage their own credibility easily enough on their own. For months and months the Coalition has been ridiculing Labor for being the party of higher taxes, for their only ideas on solving problems being introducing new taxes etc. and the only substantial part of the budget reply was to suggest an increase in tax.
Dogma – I’m with you. I don’t think Kev & Swannie are explaining things in simple terms.
They all talk in billions for this that and the other – it frightens a lot of people. They need to say the medicare levy only costs $6 or $7 a week to high earners.
They need to say the pension age hasn’t change for 100 years or so. In those days we only lived to 70, if that. Now we have heaps of people over 100.
I’m retired in 2002 (other half nearly carked it) but I would still be working if he was OK. I am quite a few years over the 65 mark but still get asked if I want to head to the office. Some jobs are just made for experience, older people. They can mentor the young ones.
Physical jobs are another matter – I can see a lot of the bluecollar workers having problems even thinking about another 2 years.
But WHY aren’t Labor emphasising the Libs want the same lift.
They can’t waste money on advertising because the hypocrites on the other side will scream and their psychophantic press mates will bleat it loudly too.
Labor need to speak in simple terms sometimes.
This poll is most certainly FIXED by the Labor party! I think Labor are just trying to booby trap Costello into taking the leadership now so they can finish him off now. Costello won’t fall this!
Bree
noone in the Labor party wants to finish Costello off, either now or in the near future.
We really appreciate the job he’s doing right now and hope he will continue.
If he gets to be Leader, yes, we’ll do him like a dinner, but personally, I’m not fussed if this doesn’t happen for the next five years or so.
We want to do him slowly.
I thought I made myself clear, but I sometimes what I think and what gets written are two different things.
Obviously people are scared about the deficit, pension age increase and the super cuts. Explaining to people about the reasons for deficits and the measures that the government and treasury are going to do to get out of deficit are also a must. Don’t underestimate how powerful it would be to put people’s minds at ease.
Everyone says governments put spin to every message that their trying to explain. I’m not talking about the $164mil that Howard spent on WC, but a smaller ad campaign. Do you really think that EVERY single message the government puts releases to the media is spin (emphasis on the every), I’m sure that a few a containing facts. Everything cannot be stopped becaused it’s thought of as spin, the public still has the right to information.
With the GFC and recession, these things weren’t caused by the government and the government should be explaining to taxpayers how they’re going to ride this storm and come out the other end.
Thanks BH, you said it better than I was trying to do.
If they put it the way you said it, the message is simple and people move on. What’s happening is that everyone is trying to work out how much of the billions and millions effect them.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498284-5013871,00.html
Bree – Costello is probably finished anyway. Don’t think many in his own party are really enthused about him and it shows on his face on most days.
This is undeniably a political message rather than mere statements of fact. It would be inappropriate for a government to spend taxpayers money ‘explaining’ that they aren’t respsonsible for the economic position of the country.
It would be appropriate to advertise changes to the private health rebate and exactly what difference they will make to individuals, though. Just the facts though, no arguments on why the moves were necessary.
ltep I think you and I are going have to agree to disagree.
Yes, Itep – advertise the changes so that most people can see they will pay nothing extra and that those who will pay are not going to be all that disadvantaged.
We all make choices about private health. I have very wealthy friends who just won’t take it out and are happy to use the public system. They have waited for knee ops without complaining.
The Lib voices are very strong at times and they know exactly how to make lies sound believable. I am constantly amazed at the misnomer’s they spread.
Thank God for George Megalogenis – he works it out factually. I may not be happy when his writing does not suit my mob but at least I know he is genuinely trying to explain things.
His Insider stuff this week was great – we would never have heard it except for George.
From the McMullan article -
Puts it all into context really.
misnomer’s …urrgh!! forget the apostrophe, please
“Opposition parliamentary secretary Mitch Fifield said the Coalition would not celebrate the latest poll.
“I think all corks are staying firmly in place,” Senator Fifield told Sky News.
Code for, the Nielsen results don’t tally with Liberal internal polling?
And then he went on to lie through his teeth – exaggerate, falsify and be his obnoxious self GG
Not necessarily GG. Why would you celebrate a poll which suggests you would lose an election if it was held now?
This is odd. So a Turnbull Government would not believe the advice given to it by Treasury? So any information they received which they didn’t like would be ignored?
This little scare might make the Govt think twice about playing with the access age for Super.
With regard to the Alcopops tax I was wondering if there were any in the L&NP emboldened enogh by this poll to change their mind on it and seek to block it. We will know the Newspoll tonight. If the Newspoll confirms this poll then the L&NP may well think there is no risk in blocking that tax.
Gary,
If the Nielsen confirmed internal results then the Libs would be quite chuffed they were possible on the way back. I think there are six degrees of celebration only some of which include alchohol.
The latest idea from Crosby/ Textor is to put doubt in the mind of voters about the accuracy of the advice given to government. Of course such a tactic MAY work well now but if they get back into government anytime soon it could come back to haunt them.
And what do Poll Bludgers think about hearing JWH on the weekend saying that the current deficit position would have been a lot better if Workchoices were still in operation?
Won’t Abetz questions be interesting in Senates Estimates – along with his usual rudeness to Treasury officials.
Was just reading yesterday’s posts.
827 Showson – I reckon Gough will be truly recognised in years to come. I was a bit late to benefit from his free Uni education so had to go after the kids were grown up.
That was a huge boost to kids whose families couldn’t afford to pay for Uni.
Public health again – fantastic. I remember my very elderly grandmother being treated like a second class citizen at RAH before Medicare. It was not a nice time to be sick.
So Gough gets a huge thankyou and then Keating for making sure we deregulated.
I tend to think the Govt doing a short advertising/information campaign on the deficit and budget forth might have been OK if it were made known as part of the budget release. It would have been a pulbic service.
But to do it motivated by political reasons (this poll for example) would be wrong.
Firstly, we don’t know if this poll is a trend or not and secondly, what proof is there that this “result” (which would see the government returned easily if it was replicated at the next election) was because of the changes to the access age for super?
Greensborough Growler AKA ultimate anti-Green Laborite – I notice you haven’t bothered to post in the Fremantle by-election thread. Does it scare you that the Greens continue to grow in popularity?
This tells us that WorkChoices was all about lowering wages and reducing conditions. From the co-author himself.
bob1234
would point out that the Greens have won by elections before, only to lose the seat again at the next (real) election.
Same thing happens to all political parties – electors know their vote won’t change the govt of the day and feel safe with a protest vote.
Hubris at its best. The Greens had better enjoy that seat because they won’t have it after the next state election.
Bob,
By elections are notorious for throwing up aberrant results especially when the outcome does not change the power balance in Parliament. We’ll see how things pan out when there is a full election that has economic issues at the core of the debate. My advice, “Smirk it while you’ve got it”.
George M answer to a blogger in which he says
Why doesn’t Labor beat the Libs around the head with that one.
GB85 .. of course it is dependant on this poll being confirmed in some way. But in anycase I think the issue is a dangerous one for government.
I’m not saying that the poll results is anything to do with Super or even the pension, just that it looks like a narrowing if not an outlier.
IF polls confirm a narrowing then the govt ought to be aware that the issue of Super which is coming up for review is a sensitive one and changing access years has the capacity to put off side many of the over 50s with Super. [the govt has said that changing the Super access year to 67 like the pension is one of the things that they would look at among many others)
Not according to this poll.
Does anyone really believe Labor would receive a 58 – 42 result in an election? Surely not.
GB – I think the Govt. will have a bit to spout about in QT when it returns.
Turnbull thinks we shld all have private health insurance and now Howard thinks pay cuts are the answer to the recession. That leaves heaps for spending to keep the place stimulated doesn’t it.
TP – I have a family member who retired at 55 in absolutely fantastic health – took his super and organised his affairs. He’s been idle for 8 years and seems to be bored stiff and miserable. To me he has aged considerably in mind and body – he feels he worked long enough (not physical stuff) and now doesn’t need to do anything, even volunteer community stuff.
I reckon he’s shortened his life and if dementia doesn’t get him then misery will.
Perhaps they can look at some way of giving a bonus if you leave the super in and stay working. If we don’t increase immigration we’ll need extra bodies working.
I also tend to think the Govt hasn’t been clear enough on its Pension changes. Firstly in highlighting its gradual introduction and also that it has nothing to do with Superannuation. People often don’t separate the two in their minds.
The first things I heared people (all over 50s) talking about after budget night was people saying they wouldn’t be able to access their Super.
From what I can gather, this poll was taken over a period of “two months” not a couple of days prior to release.
In that case, there should not have been a substantial variation in public opinion to that expressed in the other fortnightly/ weekly polls.
ie, Neilsen would in reality, be most unlikely to pick up a negative trend in voter intention that the others have not, especially taking the poll over a two month period.
Wondering why the government on the weekend announced the solar power initiative. I hope it wasn’t because their internal polling is showing a similar movement to this Nielsen, and thus the need for a “rallying” announcement.
BH – I’m not advocating early retirement, especially if nothing productive or time filling is done to replace work. I’m just pointing out how sensitive people are with it.
People often dream of early retirement only to find themselves bored when they achieve it.
Why would I want to spoil my weekend watching that man? I’m trying my hardest to forget him after having to put up with non-stop media appearances over 11 years.
TP
I completely agree that the retirement age/super thing hasn’t been well explained. I suspect that as everyone works out what is going on that the unhappiness about it will drop off and it will be business as usual.
Scorpio. [poll was taken over a period of “two months”]
If that is the case I gather there would have had to have been an enormous shift against the government in recent times.
Diogs,
Agree. If there was anything in it politically, the Libs would have been all over it. Or, do I give them more credit than they deserve?
This poll seems an outlier so maybe not good for picking up the mood on a single issue.
With regard to Super they would need to do a poll the over 50s to see how much of an issue it is and I guess they probably will do that.
If it does looks anything like an issue with that age bracket it then becomes an issue that the Liberals can latch on to and of course do their usuall middle class welfar bit to win that segment over. The Govt needs to be very clear and persistent when talking about these issues.
AC Neilsen did not have a prebudget poll. When their last 58/42 came out it seemed a bit of an outlier anyway. Pleased to see our ABC calling it a “poor” poll result. Yes, a better position than the last election is still poor. Also think Grattan is trying a Gary Morgan and pinning the change on one issue- pension age.
Sorry TP I missed the point. You are right – they probably only heard ’super changing’ and that’s enough to worry them without really investigating the changes.
From the Grattan article in the link above:
dogma at 91 youre right. It should be the government not George M. making these points. Why are they afraid to do so??
OMG OMG!! Pass the suicide pills!
HONEYMOON OVER!!!
THE NARROWING!!
and now!
THE SLIDE!!! Yikes!!
help-help-me rhonda!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mZ0ApTA-y4
Phil Coorey SMH says Turnbull will support the alcopop tax and Roxon said that the government will have the tobaccky tax as well as the alcopop tax. Economically sound for a recession, politically good for both parties, but voter land mightn’t like the new taxes unless they see benefits to the health departments and hospitals. Or some money being paid of the deficit, and that would have to be communicated effectively to voterland.
This is only the second time the Greens have won a lower house single-member seat in any Australian parliament (the first being Cunningham), and the first time their primary vote was higher than Labor’s (the Green primary in Cunningham was 23%).
Antony Green himself has stated the Greens have a good chance of retaining Fremantle at the next election.
Good one Vera – we should send that the to the MSM. Still waiting to see the Swannies.
I agree Dogma – Govt. has to say that will put the tax taken into health. The mob will love that and it’s the right thing to do anyway.
Andrew 108
I pay a million (monopoly money) to find out the reason why Labor didn’t get rid of the lie that Lib’s left a surplus and sound forcasts. Just think that if they did then we wouldn’t be getting this scare campaign. Why do the Liberals have to scare people all the time?
Yes dogma particularly given how Howard trashed Labor’s record with the black hole claims. Does anybody have the inside story on why Labor is scared to run this line. It’s been in the OO after all!!!
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/rudd-defends-relationship-with-china-20090518-b84h.html
I am not too sure that China is really that worried about its relationship with Australia at the moment. i have been keeping an eye on the People Daily, the official mouthpiece of CCCP.
I can see no editorial about this issue and the news reports have been on:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/6659736.html
It does make you wonder about the OZ’s Chinese torture.
OMG, it’s the harrowing!!!!!!!
The “surplus”, as we know, was less than half the value of one stimulus package. Some surplus! Especially given that the Howard Party spent or gave away more than 15 times that amount (314 billion) between the 2004-2005 budget and the 2007 election.
Doesn’t the Chinese spokesman’s views leave egg on Turnbull’s face – has he commented yet.
Swannie’s Chinalco decision will make for interesting times for Turnbull too.
One of my ‘not interested in politics’ kids just rang – said ‘is that right that media think Kev’s popularity is lousy at 64% – wish I was that popular with the opposite sex’. So we had a laugh. He is learning some lessons about the MSM.
Meanwhile in US politics…
An interesting pice here about form3er US defence secretary Colin Rumsfeld’s role in withholding army resources from the Hurrican Katrina relief debacle back in 2005. How did this man keep his job so long?
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_05/018217.php
I wonder if we will ever hear the full truth on what he and Cheney did.
BH my kids think I’m crazy for being interested in politics, but their teenagers and think all adults are crazy ATM.
I read that Socrates, it seemed until the pilot told Bush on a flyover that they weren’t asked to he had no idea. Rumsfield had some sort of problem with that organisation and would rather have let the people effected by the hurricane fend for themselves then to swallow his pride and get these emergency relief helicopters to New Orleans.
The more you hear about Bush’s whitehouse picks, the more disgusted you get that they can treat their own people like that, let alone people from another country, and the more the Repugs party has been taken over by extreme right nuts.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/18/2573361.htm
Deviation from the Liberal leader, interesting…
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25499681-5005962,00.html
Them’s the joys of being a teenager’s parent Dogma. You do actually survive and they are fascinating creatures as they become adults – otherwise we may have put them down. lol.
I will be their world so they have to learn that the Libs tell porkies about deficits and debt.
I helped pay off WW2 and the ‘61 credit squeeze, the ‘74 Oil shock recession , the ‘87 share collapse and the ‘01 socalled Asian crisis.
How dare kids nowdays think they should get away with thinking they don’t have to earn their place here.
And I could play the violin and say I lost a father to WW2 but we old Blue Gen. we just got on with things and in the course of it had to put up with Lib Govts. who did nothing but try to strike fear into our hearts and give us b…y Workchoices.
By the sound of your posts your kids will be OK.
“Barely four months into his presidency, Obama is confronting growing dissatisfaction among members of his liberal base, who feel spurned by a series of his early decisions on issues ranging from guns to torture to immigration to gay rights”.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22604.html#ixzz0FpFankY0&B
A piece from The Economist puts into perspective the absurd fear campaign on debt in the budget:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13604663
The killer line is here:
“The IMF reckons that AVERAGE government debt for the richer G20 countries WILL EXCEED 100% OF GDP in 2014, up from 70% in 2000 and just 40% in 1980.”
Makes our debt of 14% of GDP look rather small, like someone’s credibility.
YEAH!! My Aussie passport arrived in the mail today, while I’ve been a citizen since Australia Day 2007, this seems much more real than looking at a piece of paper with Amanda Vanstone’s sig on it
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aEUmnImwo6q8&refer=home
yes, his name was Lula
He was a president
With yellow feathers in his hair
And a dress cut down to there
He knows how to samba,
from Copacabana to the Great Wall of China.
Eat your hat out Bazza.
Socrates, out of interest, what % of GDP was our debt in 2000?
dogma 122
Yes you realise that for Bush and Co. Iraq and waterboarding weren’t abberations. They treated their own citizens the same way when they could. There is something more than slightly sociopathic about people who see others as means to such an extent.
Net debt or gross debt ltep? It wasn’t in the article but I’d assume the NET debt of Australia then (2000) wasn’t much, certainly a lot lower than the structural deficit the Coalition left the new Labor government.
Good on ya Juliem. Hope you’ve got your strine down pat for your trip.
Just read crikey’s bit on Rumsfield. Surely he won’t be able to get away with all this.
Nope, she’s still got that Yankee Drawl
BH [I helped pay off WW2 and the ‘61 credit squeeze, the ‘74 Oil shock recession , the ‘87 share collapse and the ‘01 socalled Asian crisis.]
Good bloody point BH, If we didn’t have deficits then nothing would be built and everything would stand still … sort of like when Howard was PM.
JulieM
congratulations … how’d your photo turn out
There goes that mantra that the “Rudd Govt has not taken tough decisions” in the budget. And that it was a budget to please everyone.
The honeymoon is always longer under the Coalition.
bob, until that petulant child of a former treasurer doesnt put up (ie. challenge) or shut up, we should ignore him
Amigo GG
Still no critisism of this by Obi fans who got stuck into Rudd I notice 
I wonder if the US green groups will be as scathing at Obi’s 17% targets as ours were at Rudds 15% and now possible 25%
Also what still gives me the shudders about Obi is that he still sounds like the snake oil salesman to me at these town hall meetings
Another thing is the parties he always seems to be having with celeb guests at the White house and is portrayed on the TV laughing and partying, if that was Rudd our press would be calling him Nero!
Good on you Aussie Juliem
Socrates
Everyone should read the GQ piece on Rumsfeldt, who was probably the worst US person in public life in our generation. He redefines despicable. Nixon was an absolute saint in comparison.
http://men.style.com/gq/features/landing?id=content_9217
Costello won’t put up. He knows he’s got too much explaining to do about his profligate spending and structural deficit. If this Neilsen poll is indicative of a trend there’s nothing surer than Costello will sit on the outskirs (though not too far from the centre of the action), smirkingly undermining Turnbull with public contradictions while feeding rhetoric, hand-in-puppet style, into Turnbull’s underlings such as Hockey.
BH, I’ve not read that, I rarely if ever go to Crikey. On principle because I refuse to pay for my news so if it isn’t free, I’m not reading it unless someone else cuts and pastes it for me
….. I know a few Crikey things are free but I’m not wading through the site to try to find them.
That having been said, I have no confidence at all that anyone of any import in the Bush Admin. will be hung out to dry for their activities. Sadly, that doesn’t seem to be Obama’s modus operandi
. Bush, himself, is arguably more in the “wrong” with “treatment” (not using the other ‘t’ word so I don’t set off Lib regulars on PB) of detainees than Nixon was vis a vis Watergate. Nixon, as you know historically, was pardoned by Ford. I feel that the same instincts that guided Ford at that time are behind Obama’s thinking now (protect the “institution”, blah, blah, blah). So, the bottom line is it doesn’t matter how wrong or bad the upper echelons of Bush Jnr’s admin were, they won’t be held to account for it.
dogma 135,
It is a POS
……… I’ve seen mugshots that look better 
Vera,
I’ve noticed a lot of the Obama cheersquad are starting to realise that he’s just another garden variety politician and that they’ve been used and abused. There are plenty of post hoc rationalisations hiding a growing awareness that they have been had.
Amigo GG & Vera,
Not to mention his jivin’, dunkin’, rappin’, and canin’ are just as fresh as Dubya’s tappin’
I agree Juliem – they will probably be spared to save the ‘Institution’.
Better Obama/Biden than the alternative McCain/Palin GG – so I’ll still keep hoping that he’ll make a difference despite the conventional obstacles.
Cuppa, As my kids would say “I’m soh ova” Costello. His mug has been on every newspaper everyday for the last 12yrs and just like Howard people would be sick of seeing it, when they put compost over the top of it. Oh and Epic fail.
GG
Us liberal intelligentsia elite types have been thrown under the bus by Obama. The writing was on the wall after he beat Hillary and shifted to the centre against McCain. He’s shifting even further. At least the Ruddster never pretended he was a liberal.
GG @ 144
They are all politicians at the end of the day… but then again, would Hillary have done any differently?
BH
Glad Democrats are in power but us amigos preferred Hillary
LOL! Turnbull is more like G.P. every day! He wants his own FACTS as well as his own opinions:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25499390-601,00.html
Turnbull’s figures seem to assume that as the price of tobacco products increases, more people will start smoking.
Now let’s see, would I prefer Bush in power or Obama? Would I prefer McCain in power or Obama? Would I prefer the Democrats running the show or the Republicans? Am I happy with the change? Yes to all, so I’m not complaining.
Dio
Thanks I’ll read the full GQ piece on Rumsfeld, though I suspect I’ll be depressed by it.
Finns with all that jivin’ going on Obi could become the next amigo
Oz frog #149:
I think the point is that no Clinton wouldn’t have been any different, but that Obama purported to be. You may recall his determination at one stage to clean-up Washington, portraying himself as an outsider not trapped by the Federal bureaucracy, log-rolling and so forth.
The decision to revive military commissions has all the look and feel of a truly ‘Washington’ decision. That said, it’s not clear he has much of an option, particularly if trying the detainees in US courts is impossible due to legal complications.
At one time Obama was criticized as being naive. I don’t think this was ever true of him, but certainly was/is true of those supporters who believed that radical change in US politics was achievable in the short term.
Hilliary would have been no different. If you were expecting a saint you were naive in the first place. Time to get real.
Let me revise that sentence. No to the first two questions and yes to the last two.
What are these so-called ‘complications’?
Ahh, so now he is lying. To what end?
No, I was genuinely wanting to know what ‘complications’ mean the Guantanamo detainees cannot be tried via the regular judicial system.
160 – fair enough.
Well, Itep, I think (and it’s been some time since I looked at it in any depth) that they include issues to do with retrospectivity, coercion, imprisonment, and the fact that the term ‘unlawful combatant’ is undefined in the laws of war, amongst others.
Now, you and I might agree that if the US can’t meet the standards that would allow them to overcome these problems then the detainees should go free. However, this would mean, effectively, sending a whole bunch of people back to a warzone with renewed motivation to fight the US. This would, I suggest, be a mistake both politically and militarily.
Pragmatically, then, some form of military commission may be the only way to effectively put on trial the detainees.
Ahem… ‘put the detainees on trial’
Most certainly I would agree with that.
Bule
Their biggest problem is that they know almost none of them would be found guilty in a US (or Oz) . The US have also said that they will not send them back to their home country. They really have a problem with what to do with them.
They would all be found innocent – they were not given a Miranda Warning. So a US court would throw the case out. That is why they are being held in Cuba.
Yep, Diogenes, that’s why a revised form of military commission is the most pragmatic solution Obama has.
Clearly he created a rod for his own back in his prior criticism of the commissions used under the previous administration, and raised unrealistic expectations in a key section of his constituency. The question is, was he naive in creating the impression that he wouldn’t use such a system himself, or were his supporters naive in believing him?
Or both?
Could they not give them the warning now and discharge all evidence they’ve improperly obtained at Guantanamo?
Gary, could be both. However, I’d give Obama more credit than that. He couldn’t well be silent on the issue, and so chose to speak to the concerns of this significant section of his supporters.
I guess another question (perhaps more pointed) would be whether or not he ever believed that he would be able to avoid such a process. I would suggest that a person as well advised and clearly in touch with the issues as he is and was could not have possibly believed that he would be able to avoid using commissions in some form.
He did, it would appear, neatly avoid ruling it out (otherwise we’d surely be seeing quotes to that effect).
No, she wouldn’t have done any different. She never pretended to want to have done anything different.
But Obi said he would have done something different and he said “Yes, we can”. And you gullible lots believed him
That was the point that the Amigos were making and bashed into pieces like the miserable mices.
Diog, how does it feel,
to be under the bus?
with no direction home,
like a rolling stone.
Finns
I feel just like all the people who voted for Rudd believing that he wanted to address climate change as “the greatest moral challenge of our generation” must feel. It’s a sort of squashy feeling with exhaust fumes and tyre marks on you.
Diog, The Ruddster has an “excuse”, its’ called GFC & TGR. Obi has NO excuse.
If the Guantanamo detainess get access to the US courts, they will all be released, and will probably be able to sue for compensation. Their detention is undoubtedly illegal under US domestic law, and so has their treatment been in many respects. That’s why the Bush administration has gone to such lengths to keep them away from the reach of the US legal system. Obama has no doubt been told this, and also that it will be on his head if they are all released and some of them then promptly return to terrorist activities, as some of them certainly would. So he has to find a way of closing Guantanamo as per his promise, without allowing the detainees, or at least those judged to be still dangerous, which is probably most of the, to be released. Solution: military commissions, although what he does with those who are convicted I’m not sure. If they are put in federal prisons, they will presumably be able to challenge the legal basis of their convictions. Maybe they can be sent back to Afghanistan, where the Afghan legal system will doubtless make short work of them.
I think the other excuse Rudd has is that he has a Senate made up of climate change deniers/sceptics and believers who are willing to vote against a middle of the road ETS. Just how do you satisfy the Libs and the Greens at the same time? Well you try for a middle course, one that satisfies nobody obviously but then neither would doing what the Greens want or what the Libs want. Lose/lose all round really.
ltep
I don’t think this is possible. I was watching a discussion of this a couple of weeks ago. On Fox News, when I was in Bali.
I think it was on Greta van Sosteren’s show. 3 legal types all agreed that the “terrorists” must not be moved to the US because they would be able to avail themselves to the provisions on the US constitution – they all agreed that it would be impossible to convict them of anything. The major reason was that they should have been “Mirandized” when placed in custody. If this had happened then even evidence gained through “advanced interrogation techniques” would have been admissable in a US Court.
This is another credible option. Some of them would go to Iraq.
To me this whole sorry affair illustates the wisdom of some military theorists (sorry can’t remember who) I heard speakign on the “war on terror” when it was first started. They thought then it was folly – better to just treat them (the terrorists) as criminals and apply normal criminal law to them. They felt there were ample powers to proceed that way; from profits of crime law to seize financial assetts, to powers to investigate based on conspiracy and proven threat. The Germans tried and convicted one of the Hamburg al Quaida terrorists in 2002. The second was acquitted in 2004 because even then some of the US supplied evidence was suspect.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/feb/06/september11.germany
In other words, this whole process has been tainted from the start, by using evidence obtained under dubious means, that no proper court woudl accept. So now the US are desperate to keep their non-courts, because they have stuffed up the invetigations, which they know will lead to failed prosecutions, even on the guilty.
Maybe return Guantanamo – complete with its inmates – to Cuba?
Fins
I felt under the bus with Howard too, and only had modest hopes for Rudd on this and several other issues. In fact at first he exceeed my expectations, which raised hope for a realistic policy on CC. But like Dio I see now the coal union clout is too strong.
Gary that’s why the Coalition have it so much easier in govt, there is usually a “Feilding or X’ to support them if they don’t have the numbers in the senate and they don’t ever have to deal with the Greens. Labor are stuffed because of the labor voters who think they are doing a “good thing” voting for the greens in the senate and Labor in the Reps.
‘….perhaps glad that his popularity, which still stands at a high 64 per cent, had not completely waned.’
Words fail me.
And is what the good voters of Fremantle will find out the hard way, by electing Adele Carles
179 – The Age is giving a lot of cred to a poll that may or may not prove to be an outlier. Did we really believe the last Nielsen poll? Wasn’t Newspoll giving Rudd a popularity rating in the 60’s not in the 70’s as the last Nielsen poll has done?
GB youre spot on, the last neilsen appeared too high and was months ago, so they shouldnt be making too much of their own poll- sounds like OO tactics to me. The Age is doing really well at being an OO wannabe
Are we due for an Essential Poll this arvo?
(spoilers to all of the law and order Libs out there)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Re GB, they ought to release all of the blokes (making an assumption here perhaps incorrect that no one in GB is female) unless VALID evidence CREDIBLE to a neutral 3rd party is strong enough to keep them. Those people, try under proper court rules and protections and if convicted, give them credit for time already spent at GB. Close GB and we are done with it.
Oh and while we are at it, close all of the detention centers and give of them all Aussie citizenship
…..
Doesn’t matter what bloody country it is, we don’t need that sort of place. IF someone falls in trouble with the long arm of the law, that is what a JAIL is for (after they are in the country instead of assuming they will cause trouble before they get here).
The age ran all those “exclusive” stories on Fitz and the Chinese spy lady for a couple of weeks
Juliem
A very special welcome to our newest Aussie bludger.
Essential this arvo and Newspoll tonight. Poss has breakdown of Neilsen Poll
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2009/05/18/ooooh-a-close-one/
Only poss can come up with these headlines.
Socrates, the German cases involved offences committed *in Germany*. The Guantanamo guys have never set foot in the US, they are being held because they were captured by US forces in Afghanistan or Pakistan, yet they are not legally POWs because they were not part of a the armed forces of a recognised state – hence “illegal combatants.” So that’s not much of a precedent. The options seem to be (a) release them (b) put them in front of US courts, which would release them (c) send them somewhere where they will not be released or cause any further trouble to anyone – most likely Afghanistan, where the Afghans will thrown them off a cliff or whatever they do there.
The expressed Chinese unhappiness is a gift for Rudd.
It destroys the Turnbull/Bishop meme that Rudd is a kowtowing, fawning, pliant tool.
Did anyone see the Karl Rove article in the OO? He puts a shiver down my spine, Dick Cheney makes me hope there is such thing as hell.
Essential Report also shows a drop in St Kev’s approval ?
These are not people arrested for littering, Juliem. Those kinds of civil law considerations don’t apply. If they’re released, many of them will go straight back to the Taliban or al-Qaeda. Obama can’t take that risk or that responsibility.
David Speers of Skynoooos is getting very wet of himself with the Nielsen Poll and now with the Essential Poll. But No good news for Turnbull on the Essential Poll.
What does the Essential poll say?
Finns
I think Speers was orgasmic over Neilson.
Essential Report – TPP, Labor up 1 to 62.
Psephos
The DOD has said they won’t repatriate them. If they were pi$$ed of with the US enough to be freedom fighters/insurgents/terrorists or whatever, just imagine the hatred they have for the US now. Any completely innocent person would turn that way after what they’ve been through so I shudder to think how the ones who already hated the West feel.
The problem is what to do with all the ones even the military tribunal can’t find guilty. Not too many countries have said they will take them. I’m pretty sure we’ve already said no.
9 point drop in Rudd’s approval, Turnbull approval up but disapproval also up. No TPP yet. embargoed till 4:30.
Naughty Poss.
Tough decisions are always taken under the Labor Govt.
Psephos:
Those who were/are members of the Taliban would have a reasonable argument that in fact: Afghanistan is a recognised state; the Taliban were the government of Afghanistan at the time of the invasion; therefore they were legal combatants seeking to uphold the sovereignty of Afghanistan against foreign invaders, entitled to the protections of prisoners of war.
Those who were/are members of Al Qaida have a more difficult argument.
Of course I pay no attention to polls, but…….
That will be hard to explain. Why would Rudd’s approval rating be down yet the party rating goes up?
#199, I thought Speers was having an organism
Well, the US has already ruled that they’re not POWs, and unless they can get themselves in front of a US court they can’t challenge that ruling. So long as they are in the legal no-man’s-land of Guantanamo, the US can do as it pleases with them. Obama is committed to closing Guantanamo, so he has created this problem for himself. I don’t see any simple solution for him, other than that all the detainees should suddenly and unfortunately succumb to swine flu, which is particularly virulent in Cuba, I’m told.
#207, Because Rudd took hard decisions and his Party was having a party. Everyone loves a party.
Gee those Nielsen budget question numbers are very good
Expect Essential to be totally ignored by the MSM given its numbers for the government
Sure, but that just means that they’re not POWs because the US government has decided to unilaterally overturn international law, not, as you previously said,
If that’s just semantics, my apologies.
Psephos
My view is that the moral problem doesn’t lie with the ones who really are enemy fighters. The problem is the innocent odds and sods who got swept up in what can only be described as an incompetent, gung ho, ‘arrest’ process.
The innocent ones, who may have spent the last quarter or third or so of their life being tortured in Gitmo, are probably by now terrorists in waiting as well. If they get to tell their families what is happening to them then they will have become an inspiration and a duty to their extended families back in Afghanistan.
Your reference to ‘throwing them off a cliff’ is fairly indicative of another aspect of our more general problem. Sixty per cent of Afghan police can’t read the laws they are supposed to be applying, should they happen to feel the inclination to do so. The latter appears to depend on a balance between who is paying them for what on the one hand, and what they feel they can get away with on the other hand. These are our ‘good’ guys.
The correct strategic solution is to put the inmates on the mainland and let the American courts decide. If that results in a hundred and fifty Taliban fighters being released, tant pis. There are thousands where they come from and their very existence in a lawless torture house no doubt inspires thousands more. This will not be ‘won’ by whether the US kills a few hundred more or less people. It depends on what happens in people’s minds.
Once that is done, Obama has a clean slate from which to operate.
Is Poss having a lend of us? Or is 62/38 fair dinkum?
It’s legit
Easy for you to say, pal. You won’t have to wear the heat when one of them turns up at LAX in an exploding weskit. Obama will.
Pesphos
Should Australia take some? We have said no to Bush, but not to Obama.
Looks like a problem from hell to me.
where has this poll been reported?
Right here Adam
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2009/05/18/essential-report-turnbull-boost-lasts-16-hours/
Poss has the details and sinks in the paw/boot.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2009/05/18/essential-report-turnbull-boost-lasts-16-hours/
Adam
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/
Bule, Obama is not proposing to treat them as POWs either. If they were POWs, they couild legally be detailed until the end of the war, whenever that might be. But they would acquire all the rights that the Geneva Convention gives POWs, such as not having to answer any questions. No US administration is going to accept that restriction.
Possum, when did you obtain the franchise for releasing Essential Research polls?
196, while we both vote Labor, agreement stops there. I’m not out here today to argue a point that I know isn’t popular, just to state it.
and I know these people weren’t there for “littering” too.
I took a “what party are you most affiliated with” quiz one time. I got almost 90% Democrats (so sad that they aren’t viable any more) and in the high 70’s for both Greens and Labor, Greens about 2% higher than Labor. I don’t expect many people to be sitting where I am on the political spectrum and I can accept that.
Glad you enjoy your pov, I chose not to share it
ER’s budget question responses were more negative for the budget than ACN, yet the 2PP was better in the ER poll! Go figure…
Agree on it being easy to say. By definition everything poll bludgers say is easy to say.
It isn’t Obama releasing them. It will the American court system.
Obama will also wear the heat if he fails (or, more probably, ‘fails to win’) in Afghanistan because he has lost the political battle. This would most likely happen in Pakistan self-immolates.
In relation to the Gitmo torture victims, his choices are a balance between being strategic ‘yes we can’, or muddling through, ‘well, maybe we can a bit here and a bit there btu not a bit there’. My view is that the latter is the worst option because it is short-term, short-sighted and a propaganda gift to the Taliban that far outweighs any military consequences.
Obama was elected to lead, not flub. It’s time we got more of the former and less of the latter.
Psephos, I don’t.
William gets it the same time I do.
Yep, lest we get sidetracked down a hypothetical dead-end, the simple fact is that the detainees will not receive recognition of any rights that they may or may not enjoy under international law so long as they remain detainees in US custody.
It is conceivable, I think, that if returned to the domestic jurisdiction of the states from which they were taken they would receive a higher level of protection of rights than they would while in the US. Certainly, on a somewhat pessimistic reading it is possible that they could be subject to summary (arbitrary) justice and imprisonment.
Alternatively, it is possible that international legal rights activists could have greater sway over nascent democracies than they do over democracies with deeply entrenched international power.
This is untrue. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that “enemy non-combatants” being held at Gitmo have a right to have their cases reviewed before a civilian judge. It also ruled that the Military Commissions were unconstitutional, because the Congress tried to remove the prisoner’s rights, WITHOUT explicitly saying that was the intent of the bills.
The Supreme Court majority actually stated that a piece of legislation that EXPLICITLY removes habeas corpus WOULD be constitutional, but the way the military commissions were constituted aimed to have this effect, without explicitly stating it was the wish of the congress to remove such rights.
Bush knew that with a Democratic senate majority, it would’ve been impossible for a bill to pass congress that explicitly stripped away the rights of Gitmo detainees, so he never even tried to have one passed, even though that is obviously what he wanted.
And releases it at 4.30pm WST – Possum releases at 4.30pm EST.
That’s the difference
Julie, the islamofascists don’t care who you vote for. They’ll kill you just as readily as they’ll kill me. All you have to be is in the wrong airliner or the wrong cafe in Bali at the wrong time. If you want to let these [snip]s loose on the world again, you will share responsibility for their subsequent actions.
Labor handles the expectations of the Budget really well. In the ER figures, look at the expectation of the budget sucking (38%) compared with the number who said it did actually suck (25%). The converse was true of those who expected it to be good for them (19%) versus the 25% who actually said it was good for them.
Oh, oh, looks like someone’s ‘with the terrorists’…
Did someone put a speed hump in the way of THE SLIDE
Psephos
Being consistent, the ones who supported them being held without trial and tortured should wear the murderous consequences for the terrorist propaganda they have provided to inspire other crazies to kill people?
ShowsOn #229, excellent post, thanks.
Do you know how many detainees have been released as a result of these decisions by the Supreme Court?
Is there any more info on todays Neilson? Sky Noos had a 55+ breakdown abandoning Labor and we have the weird Vic primary showing the Rabble 5 points in front.
Was there anything more in the dead tree versions of Fairfax today?
Rua – full Nielsen breakdown is the first link:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2009/05/18/ooooh-a-close-one/
235 But Boerwar that can’t be measured though a released detainee who is involved in terrorism leaving their ‘fingerprints’ at the scene of the crime will be irrefutable evidence that the justice system failed.
Just my thoughts.
should have said:
“who is involved in terrorism after their release” for clarity
Steve K
Point accepted.
I suspect that had I been in charge in the 1700 and 1800’s in greater London, the transport policy wouldn’t have eventuated either. ( and if that branch of history had been the one we’re all travelling now, I’m certain it wouldn’t have been a Commonwealth passport I’m travelling on now
). Don’t think any of those supposed hardened crims have caused any long term problems 
[and those that did were promptly dealt with by the authorities of the day]
….. point being that just because one sector of society decides that another is a problem doesn’t mean that they are right in the long term.
Thanks Poss.
No 41
Conservatives don’t have a general predisposition to gloating. It should not be especially surprising.
The media will ignore any poll showing Labor’s lead increasing, it doesn’t fit the narrative of the supposed Liberal comeback.
And, can someone explain to me how the Greens victory in the Fremantle byelection is bad news for Kevin Rudd(as the MSM has been asserting today)?
I don’t know of any system of criminal law that is run on the principle that because some people may do violence if released from custody, nobody can ever be released from custody. That’s a bad principle. Sometimes people who are released from custody perpetrate horrors. In pure logic, one might say that the responsibility for this is shared by whatever rule allowed them to be released from custody and by all the people who adopted, implemented, or supported that rule. But by the same logic, the same people can also share in the credit for avoiding the worse consequences of a rule that nobody can ever be released from custody.
If Newspoll shows a significant movement (i.e. at least 3 points) shift to the Liberals, Essential Research’s credibility is going to be “severely damaged” (and I’m putting that kindly).
If, however, Newspoll comes out with another 55/45 or 56/44, it’s going to be interesting trying to explain how 3 polls over (virtually) the same time period can result in 3 completely different sets of numbers…
When dealing with rapists, murderers and paedophiles, I think it’s an excellent principle.
J-D @ 246, thanks for putting some eloquent words to this topic
……
Good on you
http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/articles/2009/05/18/1242498692259.html
dont know who she is or the show but she is the biggest loser.
evan14, perhaps the news is bad for Labor if the Fremantle outcome can be replicated at a general election in seats like Melbourne, Sydney and Fremantle as Bob Brown has been suggesting:
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/rudd-ministers-at-risk-with-greens-win-brown-20090517-b76t.html
Qld has a serious serial offender act. The theory is you stay locked up if you are not fit to be released, no matter what sentence you recieved. (I did say in theory)
Juliem 242,
Unfair to compare stealing a loaf of bread with the mass murder of total strangers.
No 250
The Biggest Loser is the weight loss competition show. Nothing particularly interesting unless you enjoy watching bastions of rotundity working out.
Has David Spears got his head out of Howard’s behind?
No 252
I can’t fathom your sadness at the idea of such an act. I don’t think certain criminals can be rehabilitated, particularly child sex offenders.
#254, the only I watch on the Commercial Channels are LIVE Sports, eg: Cricket, Rugby and AFL.
No 255
Has anyone got a link to the full Spears/Howard interview from last Friday?
Neilson says Green vote is at its lowest since 15th May 2008.
248, that is why the original post in this thread started with “Spoiler for all of the law and order Libs out there”
Lindsay Tanner and Tanya Plibersek, 2 of Labor’s best performing ministers and Bob Brown reckons theyr’e a good chance of being booted next election, yeah right.
No 257
Whether it’s live or delayed, Cricket is inevitably a purveyor of slumber.
GP I was sad because the law is not implemented properly and people are still released when they should stay locked up.
Generic Person, It’s on Sky News Australia’s you tube channel in 4 10 minute parts.
And the Federal Fremantle electorate has a lot more Labor state seats covered than just Fremantle.
But still, Bob Brown did say the same about Cunningham, and we all know what happened there
No 261
vera, anything can happen between now and the next election. With a volatile economy, obscene national debt and an incompetent Treasurer, Labor could very well be lucky to scrape through.
GP: http://www.youtube.com/user/SkyNewsAustralia
vera, Adam Bandt for the Greens ran a close(ish) second to Tanner at the last election. Bob McMullin has warned Labor against complacency (although he specifically referred to by-elections).
I think that it is unlikely that either of the current members would lose their seats at the next election, but particularly in those seats (and Grayndler), Labor will need to be mindful that simply campaigning by distinguishing themselves from the Opposition will not be enough – they must campaign by distinguishing themselves from the Greens as well.
Simply trying to deprive the Greens of oxygen may not be enough any more.
No 260
I think you should have prefaced your post with “spoiler for all victims of rape, murder and paedophilia”.
Unless the the Liberals decide to do a Fremantle and not run a candidate
No doubt GP is pleased that his conservative bretheren in Fremantle have elected a Greens Candidate
No 267
Many thanks cyclosarin.
Conservatives will always gloat less under a Labor government.
No 272
Jokes will always be recylced more under a Labor Government.
GP:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498284-5013871,00.html
No 273
recylced = recycled.
Oh wow Bob Brown has a case of monday testosteroneitis. A who cares election in state WA, fought on high density housing on the river front, has Federal implications?
Good Grief.
The problem for the Greens is will the WA greens resume their position as the real Greens or will the Tasmaniac Greens allow this?
No 274
Suffice to say bob, I disagree with George’s conclusion. But even assuming it is correct, the Labor party has continued cutting taxes. So there’s an obvious double standard.
Bule at the last election Tanner wasn’t a high profile minister of the govt. Surely this would give him a few extra points?
GP you never know if this SLIDE starts happenning
GP,
“Obscene national debt”.
Cliches will always be more boring under the coalition
Now, now, this is a fun game the whole family can enjoy.
How about:
Anonymous political donation caps will always be lower under a Labor government.
Or:
Systemic electoral disenfranchisement will always be lower under a Labor government.
vera
I agree. I think that Tanner especially will be developing a good personal following. He is personal, polite and highly competent. He is top quality.
I can’t see the Greens knocking him off. In fact, depending on general polling trends, it would not surprise me to see Tanner increase his margin.
The Greens came second in Melbourne in 2007 and then picked up Liberal preferences to make it a marginal just as happened in the equivalent state seats of Melbourne and Richmond in 2002 and 2006 and also Brunswick 2006 and the slightly safer Brunswick 2002 and Northcote 2002 and 2006. Plus at elections where mainland based upper houses are up for election the Liberals want the upper house votes that accompany the lower house primary votes.
National debts will always be more obscene under Coalition Governments.
GP @ 269.
Juliem’s original post at 188 was about those detained at Gitmo, whose guilt or innocence can now never be determined because of the failures of the Bush administration to abide by the basic principles of justice, or any national or international law.
Are there any paedophiles in GB?
Yes, vera, I agree, that’s partly why I said I think it’s unlikely that either he or Plibersek will go.
The point remains, however, that the days when Labor thinks it can afford to ignore the Greens in what should now be considered volatile seats are over. The overall campaign should be complemented by tailored campaigns (much in the way that occurs in marginals) that specifically address the threat posed by the Greens.
To slightly amend my previous post, if a ‘denying oxygen’ campaign can work, fine. I’m not sure it’s enough.
I’m not sure whether it’s been mentioned yet, but the PR referendum in British Columbia went down in a big way, only managing 38% of the vote:
http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/stats/2009-ge-ref/REF-2009-001.html
How is it a double standard? Labor said at the 2007 election that they would cut income tax. The vast majority of the deficit is a loss of revenue.
Tom the Greens came 3rd in Melbourne in 2007.
http://results.aec.gov.au/13745/Website/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-13745-228.htm
Most people don`t vote on the individual candidate but on the party. As a Labor government gets older the Green vote increases and so Tanner (or his replacement as Labor candidate) will probably be defeated be the Greens during the current government. Tanner may be moved to a safe Labor seat which may be in he Senate.
I believe William gave it a brief mention.
Er, no he didn’t:
2PP
BANDT, Adam Australian Greens 39,667 45.29 0.00 +45.29
TANNER, LindsayElected ALP 47,916 54.71 0.00 +54.71
On primary, not on two-party.
Tom, isn’t it possible that the Liberal Party could open a wider gap on primaries from the Greens?
The way to give the Greens oxygen at the next election is for Labor to continue to flub on global warming.
All those Labor voters who consider it to be No 1 will go to the only mob who appear to be wanting to treat it seriously.
Most of them will have the intelligence to recognize a solar flagship program for what it is. All flagship and no fleet.
Same as in State Fremantle in 2008
Take the Liberals out of the equation and you have Saturday’s result.
Indeed. It was already seen at the WA state election. 11% primary in both houses, with some seats in the 20s. I suspect the same thing will happen at the next NSW election. It will be interesting to see how high the Green vote gets when federal Labor becomes unpopular.
The Greens came 3rd on primary votes. Tanner got 49.51% primary vote. Dream on.
None. It only applies to them once they have been charged, so the U.S. just isn’t charging them with anything.
And the Greens don’t attract people just for their environmental policies. Environmental policies are actually pretty low on my political importance list, but I vote Green first because I feel that Labor has drifted too far to the right socially and economically. Of course they come before Liberal though.
Tom
I agree that this is true for most people. But I also believe that there are well-established and documented pIatterns where incumbents can build an advantage of enough per cent of the voters to make a serious difference.
As well as Tanner, Plibersek also appears to me to have the capacity to develop a bit of a personal following.
Primary doesn’t decide seats. Two-party does. Labor got 54% to the Greens on 46%.
The Greens came second in the all important 3-candidate preferred and then the Libs were eliminated. The Greens got more preferences from the micro-parties.
http://results.aec.gov.au/13745/Website/HouseDivisionDop-13745-228.htm
(this page is reachable, with one click, from the page of the link above).
bob1234
Tanner got more votes than Liberal and Greens combined. He won the seat on Tim Wright’s preferences.
But do not let the facts get in the way of Greenism.
But you Greenies were crowing about Adele winning the Primary vote last Saturday though
You can’t have it both ways.
The AEC EXPECTED the Greens to come second, hence the distribution of preferences between Labor and the Greens. However, in fact, the Greens came THIRD, which meant the actual result for the seat was Liberal 27.73% Labor 72.27%
thanks Poly
….. it is nice to see that the truth speaks for itself. I’ve way too many things to do with 2 children going different directions and a spouse under the weather to argue with someone who worships at the feet of Dick Cheney 
You should become a Labor spin-doctor. What bit do you not understand? The two-party vote decides the result. Labor got 54% with the Greens on 46%. End of story.
Turnbull is UNBELIEVABLE! He accuses the government of running an left wing ideological agenda, simply because it wants to STOP hand outs to millionaires. Turnbull’s riposte is to say that his increased Tobacco tax would apply to everyone, even though most smokers are poor! So his solution is to tax people, and redistribute the money to those who don’t actually need it!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25501091-601,00.html
I haven’t heard so much defiance of reality since, well, Brendan Nelson.
The Liberals increase the primary vote gap in the seat of Melbourne in their current state?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
They will probably come third on primaries and the Greens second.
SNIP: See article 2 of comment moderation guidelines – The Management.
This is not how it works. The two party preferred result is determined by the candidates who receive the most, and second most, number of primary votes. The Greens received the third most, and thus will be excluded from the final vote count.
Moderation irks me.
Showson, the Greens did come second. After the distribution of non Liberal Labor Green preferences, Labor was on 50.45%, the Greens were on 25.11%, the Liberals were on 24.44%. Thus, the next elimination was the Liberals. The Greens came second.
Wrong wrong wrong.
I’d be very surprised (and very disappointed) if Tanner’s primary vote didn’t increase at the next election. He is a very respected minister in a very difficult portfolio. Even Glen and GP acknowledge him as a stand out performer.
SNIP: See article 2 of comment moderation politics – The Management.
Bob,
What does “I feel that Labor has drifted too far to the right socially and economically” mean?
The Labor Lighthouse has not drifted anywhere. It’s the flotsam and jetsom of the Greens in their floaties that aimlesslessly float on the tide of opportunism that are the drifters of Australian politics.
bob
and you’re ignoring that, on over 49% of the primary, Tanner was home and hosed.
Primary votes are harder to lose than 2PP – that is, the rusted on voters tend to vote much the same way election after election, whereas the minor party vote is more volatile.
If Turner’s primary is 49%, and that is a solid figure over a number of elections (haven’t done the research), then he’s safe as houses.
And – in reference to Tom’s previous point – no, the candidate is generally thought to influence only 2% of the vote (I personally don’t believe this, but we’ll go with the accepted figure). That isn’t a big figure, but it’s significant in cases such as this. Tanner’s increased profile due to his ministerial duties should thus give him even more of a buffer.
I would expect Tanner to improve his vote next time around.
bob1234
When Tanner got 50% + 1 vote he won the seat. That was after the distribution of Democrats preferences. The Green and Liberal vote was irrelevant.
To further clarify. The candidate with the least amount of votes is eliminated, and their preferences distributed. This cycle continues to occur until there are two candidates left. After the elimination of candidates and distribution of preferences, Labor was on 50.45%, the Greens were on 25.11%, the Liberals were on 24.44%. Thus, the next elimination was the Liberals. The Greens came second.
Repeat, the two candidate/party vote and the two candidates it boils down to DOES NOT, repeat DOES NOT come from the two highest primary votes. Sheesh.
LOL ok you think that.
When Tanner got 50% + 1 vote he won the seat. That was after the distribution of Democrats preferences. The Green and Liberal vote was irrelevant.]
That’s what I meant!
2pp
BANDT, Adam Australian Greens 39,667 45.29
TANNER, Lindsay Australian Labor Party 47,916 54.71
So a 10% margin is on the brink of defeat?
zoomster and ruawake – I never said Tanner didn’t win his seat in 2007. But the two-party vote was 54% Labor to 46% Green. When Labor becomes unpopular and the swings are on, the swings are on, regardless of which MP occupies it. It is an at risk seat. Some ALP strategists have warned those in and out of the party who follow Labor not to remain complacent – your attitude shows the complacency continues.
A 4.71% margin. And that isn’t much. Up to 6% is considered marginal by the AEC, up to 10% fairly safe.
The AEC distributed the the 2-candidate preferred between the Greens and Labor because they were the last 2 in the race. The Greens came third on primaries but overtook the Liberals on preferences.
Read the preference count here
http://results.aec.gov.au/13745/Website/HouseDivisionDop-13745-228.htm
When it was down to the last 3 candidates
Labor 44,182 Greens 21,996 Liberal 21,405
Liberal EXCLUDED Labor 47,916 Greens 39,667.
Greens came second Liberals came third and anyone who says otherwise (except when referring specifically to primary vote) is a fact denier.
A song for our Green Bludgers who are dedicating this to the good voters of Fremantle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5IABqwVO2U
It’s not denialism, just ignorance.
There must a few no-hopers who could give their seat up to make sure Tanner is re-elected. I’d prefer him to stay in rather than a Green, and I vote Green (sometimes anyway).
He looks more like a Senator to me. There are a few terrible Labor Senators. He could have Penny Wong’s seat if he’d like to move to SA.
I would have thought that if labor becomes unpopular it will be the Libs that get the swings to them, enough to get them to 2nd and Labor wins probably with more of a margain
Diogenes,
You come from SA, you don’t move there!
The Prix will always be more GRAND under the Coalition.
And GG, as if you think Labor hasn’t gone too far to the right. Don Dunstan is my favourite Labor leader. He won four elections. He was more progressive than historical Labor, and was a vocal critic of the Labor governments that became somewhat more socially conservative, and way more economically liberal.
A 4.7 earthquake has struck LA.
One of these days, the big one is coming ……..
Or they could do a Fremantle, knowing they can’t win the seat, but know they could easily get the Greens installed if they don’t run.
And if half of the negative swing goes to the Greens (disenchanted Labor voters) and the other half to the Liberals, the Greens can still easily come second like they did in 2007. If Labor suffers a 10% primary swing, the Libs pick up 5%, and the Greens pick up 5%, Labor is stuffed in Melbourne.
It’s a bit sad when the Greens have to rely on the Libs to win them a seat
I wonder who would be preferred PM of Turnbull and Bob Brown?
The hotpants will always be more PINK under Don Dunstan.
And i’m not saying it will happen, but to say it won’t happen is exactly the sort of complacency that ALP strategists are talking about when referring to Fremantle, and the future.
BOb,
Nice rhetoric, but not a word of substance. You’ve introduced the word progressive, again without defining what it means.
Keep it up, my “Greens Card” on Bulldust Bingo is filling up fast.
I totally agree – they’re the left version of the Nationals
Brown can’t be a PM, he’s not in the lower house.
Dio 324,
Someone with Melbourne in their blood doesn’t move house to SA, they just visit Adelaide and then return home when they are done. Years down the road when my husband’s military wandering days are over, we will have a VIC postcode and within walking or reasonable driving distance of the trainlines so as to access Melbourne’s CBD. (the closer the better but cost will be a factor). I wouldn’t expect any less of someone who grew up in Adelaide – that they would only be visiting Melbourne
Hear hear!!!
Yeah, Don Dunstan didn’t know what he was talking about.
Frank
and it’s even sadder that Greens cant see the hypocracy in it.
The narrowing HAS finally arrived. This time it’s for real. Cossie had better make a move before it’s too late and Turnbull becomes PM. I would feel for his well being if he happened to miss out again.
1234, you dont HEAR the hotpants, you WEAR it.
And GG, Rudd has described himself as socially conservative. What more do you want?
Ha Ha Ha bwaa ha ha – raving loony pixies. Give up on Melbourne it is safe Labor, it will not even go to preferences at the next election.
Try Malcolms seat – you may win it on Labor preferences, why not Bradfield or Kooyong?
Ha ha.
Bob,
Don was a Labor man till the day he died. Go and find your own icons.
New avatar Centre? nice
Are you kidding? The polling since December 2006 has been astronomical. IF this poll rings true (see Newspoll later tonight), 53/47 is still very good. Howard was always going 3 points either way of 50/50 and he won four elections. There is much more work to be done by the coalition if they want to win. 53/47 is not enviable by a long long shot.
Man. United will always win the Premier League under Labour.
That doesn’t mean he can’t criticise Labor – and he did. Don Dunstan is my hero. Labor will always come before Liberal for me. Voting Green 1 doesn’t change that. Your attitude is appauling.
“You’re either with us or against us” GG… how very Howardesque.
Not to mention Dunstan used to be a Liberal supporter prior to being a Labor man.
Bob,
So what? I asked you to define what you mean by these indefined words you like to toss around like some much confetti.
I think that most of the difference in ALP primary vote between the HoR and the Senate was 8.82% (49.51%-40.79%) so if that if the 2% candidate figure is correct then less than a quarter of the difference was candidate based. I think that most of the other 6%ish was because of people who thought is was safe to vote Green in the Senate but in the HoR it would risk not getting rid of Howard (remember that the Green Senate primary was over a percent higher than the Green HoR primary).
1980s Labor became less concerned with social reform and more concerned with electoral pragmatism and economic neoliberalism. They wanted to beat the New Right monetarist Liberals to the punch, and they did so. Why are you fighting this? It’s well known. Keep your head buried in the sand if you want.
Thanks vera, some of the Bludgers were getting me confused with Castle so I thought I’d get a makeover.
And Brendan Nelson was an ALP member before joining the Libs as well.
So it can work both ways, but of course it doesn’t fit the Greens Script of Political Morality
Essential Research has Labor’s two-party lead up from 61-39 to 62-38. However, Kevin Rudd’s approval rating is down nine points from three weeks ago to 61 per cent, while his disapproval is up eight to 29 per cent. Turnbull is respectively up two to 30 per cent and up one to 49 per cent. Interestingly, fewer people found the budget bad for them personally than had expected to beforehand. Twenty-five per cent say it will make them more likely to vote Coalition against 22 per cent Labor.
Bob,
Under pressure, and can’t sutain your argument or explain what you’re talking about. So you go the personal bash.
How very Greens of you!
I’ve found a new thing to ban – expressing derision by saying “HAHAHAHAHAH!”, of which I’ve always taken an extremely dim view. It’s pathetically immature.
#361, so you are the Centre of the Universe, can i join?
Here is just ONE quiz. There are multiple others, I googled to find this one. The quiz I took a few years ago which gave me the numbers I mentioned earlier this afternoon, I can’t find at the moment. This one is a passable, although not as detailed, substitute. My answers were several graph lines below the Greens in about the 6:30 to 7:00 position if you imagine the hands of a clock. I was WAY down there
….. if any other bludgers chose to take this quiz, post your answers? Cheers 
…
If I find another later that I think is more comprehensive, I’ll post the URL for it.
http://www.ldp.org.au/quiz/ozparties.html
Of course, both parties have defectors.
But please please please don’t compare Nelson to Dunstan. The comparison is incomprehensible.
There will always be more banning under William.
GG, the fact you think modern Labor has the same ideals of 1970s Labor speaks for itself.
Sorry
It is the only time I have used it and I won`t use it again (I`ll stick to one or two). It was a misjudgement and I think the ban is a good idea.
Thank you, Tom. It’s been de facto banned for quite a while now, but it’s now enshrined in article 12.
This ER poll will be instantly dismissed by the likes of Glen and GP.
Bring on tonight’s Newspoll!
I will contain my derisive remarks to
– Sorry William.
Hairdryer effect?
LOL Finns. I’ll tell you something, that reminds me of when I used to go out on the chase for the opposite sex. My favourite line was – I’m searching for the centre of the universe and I think I’ve found it (would then glance at her centre). Success rate was excellent
Well when you put it like that!
Newspoll predicitons???
I’m going to be my usual pessimistic self and go
2PP: 52-48
Rudd net satisfaction: 34
Turnbull net satisfaction: minus 2
Pref PM – Rudd 62-19
Haven’t noticed any transgressions on your part Ruawake. I also don’t want to guilt trip Tom too much – his laughter was directed at the Liberal Party rather than another commenter, which is much lower order offence.
juliem @ 367
I’m not sure where this puts me.
Your economic freedom index is 3,
and your social freedom index is 5.
GG
Hmmm. That’s true about SA. What about Conroy stepping aside instead of Wong?
I found the one I was looking for earlier.
…….
Frank, you especially, can you post your numbers to compare to mine? Cheers
(and don’t fudge them either if the ALP doesn’t come out on top LOL)
http://www.ozpolitics.info/guide/fun/politics-test/
82.5% Australian Democrats
79% Greens
65.9% ALP
Bob,
You love a cliche filled sweeping statement. Just face up to it, you don’t understand the big words you use and you have absolutely no idea about mainstream politics. But, it’s OK, you have plenty in the Greens to keep you company.
Please don’t verbal me. I get cross!
Centre, that was a pearl
350 billbowe.
Nice to see that rather than debating what I type (all of which is true and you know it), you just continue to attack me.
http://andrewnorton.info/2009/02/labor-and-neoliberal-policy/
Does this mean nothing to you? Or is it all untrue? Either way your response to this will be quite the lol i’m sure.
Conroy is one of the star performers of the Government.
379, my numbers were 3 and 9 – as opposed to yours which were 3 and 5. If you look at their map (for that link), each major party is located on the map. In addition, there is another button which shows where you are in relation to the other major parties. The ALP, for example is on the arc that goes out to about where 2 would be on the clock BUT it is just a cm or so away from the center of the clock. I’m down on the 6:30 to 7 area of the clock but out on the periphery and NOT near the middle. Greens are the closest party to me and the Socialists are the only other party in the SW quadrant of the clock besides the Greens.
Ok, now it all comes together. Now I see there’s no point debating Labor’s credentials with you.
No 386
You have got to be kidding. The guy is an absolute tool. Really. Swan is a genius by comparison.
The Greens will always rely on the Libs to win (lower house) seats, unless (a) they poll 50% in their own right, or (b) they come second and Labor comes third, in which case they will win on Labor preferences (hard to see where that could happen). That’s how they won Cunningham in 2002 and Freo on Saturday. If they win Sydney, Melbourne, or Grayndler, they will do it on the back of Lib preferences. Now, far be it from me to suggest there is a covert Lib-Green alliance to dish Labor – but it is clearly in the tactical interests of both parties that there should be one.
GP and I agree on something – wow.
I understand that the FFTH network is proceeding on Labor’s terms. Who made that happen? Where is Sol? Why is McGauchie’s head on that pike?
If Conroy can bring about a structural separation of Telstra and get Telstra and Optus to swap their existing fibre networks for equity in the NBN he must be seen as the best minister in this portfolio ever ?
http://andrewnorton.info/2009/02/labor-and-neoliberal-policy/
Or he can go the third – not reply at all. Probably the safest path at this point.
That wouldn’t be hard.
392 – agreed ruawake.
No 392
No, he would be seen as a minister who couldn’t keep his filthy hands of private assets.
hands of = hands off
The majority of Australians were against the Howard privatisation of Telstra.
No 398
They kept voting him in so they can’t have been too bothered.
Indeed, the Liberal party could be characterized as a mob who couldn’t wait to get their supporters’ hands on public assets.
You should speak so harshly of little Johnny and Pete.
Your point being? A government is decided upon as a whole. The Telstra privatisation was one thing they didn’t like.
Also, Howard won 2004 because of one thing only – the Latham experiment.
The public assets will always be created under Labor and sold for a song under the Coalition.
Juliem did the quizz
Australian Democrats 87.3%
Labor Party 81.3%
Greens 75.8%
i felt sick to my toes but new it could not be correct i am a 60 year old tragic re labor
thank god. for Essential poll i am new to this
who is Glen and gp
I thought this could not be correc it just looks all wrong.
Like bob Mc said.
The majority of Australians voted Howard out in 1998, just not in the right seats sadly. Only Tampa and 9/11 saved him in 2001. Only Latham saved him in 2004. Australians never particularly liked him or particularly wanted him as PM. He just had a run of good luck, and as soon as it ran out they ditched him.
can i suggest u all email the breakfast shows so they broadcast the essential results i will do the abc now
Anyone with a braincell could surely see that selling Telstra with a wholesale and retail monopoly was not a great idea.
The previous Govt. had one criteria for selling Telstra – how much money can we make. Even now the largest shareholder in Telstra is the Future Fund. When the FF reports it excludes Telstra shares, cause they would rather not have them.
My view is the Telstra’s copper was always a public asset and should never have been sold. But Howard could not keep his filthy hands off public assets.
my say
GP and Glen are the PB Liberal supporters
GP and Glen are the PB Liberal supporters ……. that we like to kick around ala Tim Cahill
Here’s my results, Julie:
Greens 90.8%
Democrats 87.3%
ALP 79%
Family First 42.6%
Liberals 29.7%
Nationals 23.5%
One Nation 20.9%
Last time I did that test the Democrats came out on top, so I guess a few of my opinions changed in the last couple of years. I’m a bit uncomfortable with several the questions in there – for example, ‘the govt should help struggling artists’ instead of ‘the govt should increase funding to the arts’, and things where I don’t want to choose like ‘the environment is more important than social welfare’ or something. Questions could be quite a bit more neutral. Also, any new version of that quiz would need to ditch One Nation and the Democrats (
), and add in the CDP
There will always be more kicking under a labor Govt.
They’re not the only ones, I’ve noticed, but certainly the most… persistent.
Don’t worry, my say, polls may fluctuate, but it will be Kevin Again in Two-Thousand Ten.
This is nonsense. Conroy offered Hellstra 49% equity in the national broadband network if it is willing to divide itself into two separate companies.
The Broadband will always be broader under Labor, so broad you can drive a digital truck through.
thanks psephos i am so releived i can go back to knitting my grandchildren s jumpers i wasted the whole day worring could not even get the dinner ready for MOTH
man of the house.
My results:
Australian Democrats 80.1%
Labor Party 75.5%
Greens 65.9%
Family First 64.2%
Liberal Party 62%
National Party 53.8%
One Nation 41.1%
I can live with that.
Psephos @ 408:
Absolute rubbish. He won in 1998, would have won without Tampa in 2001 (his poll ratings were recovering prior) and would have beaten any other candidate Labor fielded in 2004. The public didn’t realise that Labor luminary was a psycho until mid-point during the campaign when he was already ahead.
Typical Labor spin -trying to belittle 11.5 years of prosperity, competent government and good policy as a mere abberation. This absolutely atrocious mob pales in comparison.
Well, my say, that doesn’t mean you can forget all about it – Kevin will only win again if all us Labor tragics get out and do some work. Perhaps you can knit socks for Labor doorknockers.
BTW: Howard’s approval ratings remained at surprisingly high levels throughout his lenthy period in office.
One poll doesn’t make an election.
The more interesting figures for me at the moment are Turnbull’s performance. Wil lbe interesting to see if he has improved any (I doubt it).
The fact is, after this budget why would the ALP’s vote go up? But feeling like being a bit anti the Govt for a week or two is a long way from deciding to vote for “the other mob” (as Hockey would say).
The big figure from the ACN poll was that the budget was pretty well recieved:
56-33 is a good result (in fact better than the 2PP) which suggests to me a few people thought the Budget was fair, but still wanting to give the Govt a bit of a kick for whatever slight they felt they had got from the Budget.
Mine are here:
http://www.ozpolitics.info/guide/fun/politics-test/?id=68ea754788a852c38e681ed3dea7992a
Greens 94.7%
Australian Democrats 81.3%
Labor Party 72.8%
Family First 38.4%
Liberal Party 21.9%
National Party 18.5%
One Nation 17.3%
423 – Pat, then the saint, the genius, brought in SerfChoices. What a man. As a result he lost government and HIS OWN SEAT. Yep, a genius I say.
What’s Labor’s campaign gonna be in 2010?
“To hell with the education revolution! Vote 1 Rudd for higher unemployment!”
I hope a couple of brain-dead ALP volunteer knock on my door with that one.
Yeah, that’s why Rudd Labor has polled better than Howard Liberals ever did, all the way back to December 2006. Howard could only dream of the polling Rudd Labor has received.
Suck it up princess. I know it hurts.
And it was the mining boom that put the Howard budget in to surplus.
Oh yeah – “SerfChoices” was soooo baaad. I mean, we had the lowest unemployment rate in three decades. Howard = Evil!
Treasury says that without the stimulus packages, unemployment would be double what it currently is.
If Australians want to vote for jobs, they’ll be voting Labor.
Mate – I don’t judge politcal success based on poll ratings.
If people did, the NSW Government would be one of our best in history (up until recent).
Unemployment was very low before and after WorkChoices. We had an economic boom. Were you expecting high unemployment?
Your guy lost, Pat
Shame we can’t place the Crown of Charlemagne on the head of Adam the First
No 410
Of course it was good policy to sell a vertically-integrated Telstra – the purpose was to get the highest price and thus, the best value for taxpayers. Splitting it up would have devalued Telstra and lessened the returns to the Government.
But, if you want to blame someone for the creation of a mega telco, Kim Beazley is your man.
No, just your own bias.
We all have our own political bias. But polls speak for themselves.
The Liberals are such political geniuses they helped elect a GREEN Candidate in a lower House seat in the WA Parlaiment.
Patrick don’t degrade yourself to the level of an average lefty PB supporter.
Calm down Pat. The next election people will be riminded of WorkChoices and how committted the Libs are to it. They introduced without saying anything at the 2004 election so how can we trust them not to do it again? People won’t. WorkChoices is the last thing people need now.
Not disputing that one, bob – as a matter of fact, I don’t think the Liberal Party dispute the necessity of stimulus packages as well. They just think throwing bucket-loads of money and subsidising pink-batts is poor policy. Which it is.
I think if you check PF the lowest unemployment rates in the decades have been under Kevin Rudd and Gough Whitlam. Hate to distract you with facts.
And the Tampa did win Howard the election.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2001/s357998.htm
But you go ahead and think what you want.
Finished watching the full interview between Spears and Howard. A very good interview I have to say.
Howard was a true conviction leader. Something the Australian political landscape now lacks.
No 438
The last thing people need is a Government making it more expensive to employ people.
And the vast majority of the deficit would be there regardless.
And Treasury says that without the stimulus, unemployment would be double. The $900 payments began to be paid in April. Unemployment went DOWN 0.3% in April. This was the net swing – I wonder what the gross swing was?
No 441
The decision to refuse entry to the Tampa remains a good one.
Frank – I’d vote Green to screw Labor any day.
He evaded the few negative questions Liberal Spears asked him. Yeah, great interview.
Yes, we were all rich, rich rich beyond our wildest dreams, the streets were paved with gold, Johnie Walker Blue Label was the preferred tipple for pensioners to have with their porterhouse each night.
Meanwhile the current mob are finding another way to unfairly hit the mums and dads
Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull says the proposal is an assault on aspirational Australians who want to own a piece of the companies they work for.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/employee-share-crackdown-worries-libs-20090518-bcl3.html
First they make you pay a fair price for health insurance, then they hit your tax free shares.
There are going to be “millions of Australians” really really upset at this.
Well, that means Howard as well of course.
Obviously you’re a Lib member? Are there a lot of members such as yourself committed to the re-introduction of WorkChoices? I hope so.
The point was that it won Howard the 2001 election. Something many Liberals deny. Talk about revisionism.
There will be NO old Media under Labor.
Great, a real person of principle.
You’d vote what are essentially socialists in over centrists? So much for your convictions.
Wilson Tuckey is a conviction politician. He has a conviction for criminal assault, for beating a defenceless drunk with an iron cable while two others held him down. What a man.
Essential is pretty whack.
Looks like we need Newspoll to sort out the mess. Tomorrow, right?
The Treasury had trouble predicting the extent of the surplus from year to year, let alone the unemployment rate. It is disingenous to claim, on the one hand, that current times are volatile, yet on the other, the Treasury has a crystal ball perfectly able to estimate unemployment with or without the stimulus. It’s a nonsense.
The sad thing about the current Government is that it has politicised the Treasury to an incredible extent, elevating Ken Henry to a defacto minister status. This makes a mockery of the claim that the Treasury is a bastion of independence.
Tonight/tomorrow.
But who appointed him to expecting him to do the same as he’s doing now ?
Yes if you could ever work out what they were at the time in question. His convictions changed with public opinion, hence the never ever, the refusal to use Colstons vote, WorkChoices 1 not needing modifying, the handing over to Costello, the support for Unsworth on gun control.
And Ken Henry was a Liberal mate when Howard was in power. Need a tissue?
Tonight Oz. Watch “Lateline”.
No 447
If you want to see evasion, just watch Kevin Rudd squirm his way out of saying “broken promise”.
Was it a non-core promise? LOL
No 454
Wilson Tuckey is a conviction idiot, but that’s about all.
Non Core GP
bob1234: Once again, Tampa did not win him the election. His poll ratings were recovering prior. Don’t forget that Labor backed the government’s stand as well.
And to be honest, I couldn’t care less if it was the Tampa that won it for the Libs. I am not ashamed of supporting strong border policies.
GB:
I happily admit to supporting WorkChoices – and by implication lower unemployment and higher productivity.
Howard knew how to say “broken promise” didn’t he GP? He had enough practice.
Hardly. It may have been an influential factor, but certainly not the sole reason.
Why would any politican put on record them saying “I apologise for breaking my promise”? Why give the opposiiton a free sound bite for the next election ad campaign.
Did you not read the article? Tampa singlehandedly won him the election.
Ahh, implicit admission that it was indeed the Tampa and Howard’s xenophobic exploitation that won him the election. Don’t forget it was Keating that introduced mandatory detention.
Yes, we know Liberals are WorkChoices addicts, and you all can’t wait for your next hit. The people overwhelmingly rejected it, and you, and the public will well be reminded of it at the following elections.
Good, I hope the Libs promise more of the same. Keep pushing them to take up the cause Pat and they’ll be out of office for a looong time.
By the way you left out ‘lower wages’ and ‘poorer conditions’.
Here’s a good one
Oh thank God we have brave Malcolm to stand up for the rights of those earning over $150k. Just imagine how quickly the wolves would be at thiers doors were it not for him.
Fight on, Malcolm. Fight on!!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25501091-601,00.html
Psephons, I’m not going to dispute Tuckey.
But your party has more than its fair share of crooks (Theo Theophanous), pedophiles (Bob Collins) and scumbags (Belinda Neal). Don’t get too sanctimonious!
And less secure employment with no rights.
Pity all that it lacking is any evidence that it did lower unemployment or increase productivity. Other than that though, a well made argument.
No 469
My comment was in response to bob’s snide comment that Howard evaded tough questions. The point being that politicians have a tendency to avoid answering questions they don’t want to answer.
That said, in such an interview, it would have been easy for Howard to completely reject his policies and positions and accept that he was wrong. But he didn’t. He stood by his convictions.
Another thing – it is refreshing not to listen to spin. Howard didn’t spin; he always spoke plainly.
436,
with 94.7% identification with the Greens, please don’t bag the Greens at the expense of the ALP @ 72.8% . you are cutting off your nose to spite your face
……. (that was why I asked for the numbers, I suspected same 
)
There will always be more slave labour under the Coalition.
Theophanous is innocent until proved guilty. If he is convicted, he will be disendorsed, as was his brother. Collins’s actions were not known until after he left politics. The police found that Neal had no case to answer. Tuckey however had a criminal conviction *before* he was elected. The Liberal Party has sent him to Canberra for 29 years with that record, for which he has never apologised.
No 478
Involuntary servitude is illegal in Australia. Always has been. Even under Workchoices. Please get a clue.
Hahaha, whatever you reckon GP.
He was being tongue in cheek Pseph…
Agreed.
Doubt it – why would he do otherwise? He’s not in office. He, like Keating, will always defend his own record. So he should – if he didn’t it’d mean he obviously believed in none of it.
Well obviously that is wrong. He was a politician. They ALL spin.
Howard was “snake oily” with his responses. You had to look for the “get out” what he said. No-one will convince me he was a straight talker.
Grog, that is a little scary that FF (64.2) almost beat the Greens ( 65.9)
I think I’ve heard everything on PB now.
Patrick,
I suspect you have never voted labor in your life so you hardly an unbiased observer.
The Liberals cosying up to the Greens as a strategy is fraught with problems for the Libs and the Greens. It will be quite simple for Labor to portray them as each other in drag, unprincipled and confused on policy.
The most likely outcome is that Labor will hold its seats and have an entree into allegedly more secure Liberal seats.
Compared to Kevin, he’s a straight as you’re going to get.
Reading this blog gets more depressing by the day.
Most of the main political parties in Australia believe in much the same things, and we all sit here magnifying the marginal differences. How the parties govern is less a function of what they believe in than of whether they have been in power too long and have become corrupted or have over-reached, at which point they get thrown out for a few terms.
I infer from the comments of some of the posters here that they face challenges, physical or other, which may mean that sitting at a computer terminal is one of the few pleasures available – in which case good luck to them. But the rest of us really ought to get a life, and think about whether we are adding to the sum of human knowledge here, or just scrawling hi tech graffiti for the benefit (or more often irritation) of other anonymous lost souls hiding behind avatars.
Time to go and read a book.
GP,
Your claim about involuntary servituide can be questioned.
I think you might find some of the convicts were transported specifically so they could be servants.
No, that’s your bias. We think Howard was more evasive, you think Rudd is more evasive.
But it’s true Howard was more evasive
Yeah, his conviction was to spend more money than future generations were capable of paying.
No 491
Well then, you better talk to the Members for Griffith and Liley as they have continued to cut taxes.
ShowsOn, you cannot maintain this silly double standard.
Yeah right, Mr Never Ever is honest! Mr “core and non-core” promise is honest. Mr “parents threw their children in the water” is honest! Get a grip.
Indeed.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498284-5013871,00.html
True, but I have no idea really what family first stand for. Most likely I wasn’t strongly enough in favour of gay marriage, or in my belief that abortion isn’t murder.
And if all GP can do in response is refer to Labor’s election promise of tax cuts, it shows that he has no leg to stand on. I actually feel pity for him.
No 490
I’m less concerned with evasion because that is trademark of politicians worldover.
I’m more concerned with endless spin and soundbite which is Kevin Rudd’s method. You simply cannot draw any similarities between his rhetorical style and Howard’s. Howard was vastly more plainly spoken.
What double standard? That the Liberals added so many ON GOING costs to the budget that it was destined to end up in deficit? That’s just a FACT.
Turnbull wants to keep ANOTHER one in the budget now, by refusing to means test the private health insurance hand out.
WorkChoices was nothing BUT spin!
Agreed:
major apologies to Jane Asuten.
G P:
Funny how these true believers remain completely silent out their Dear Leader’s alleged abusive, intimidating and thuggish behaviour towards his own staff, isn’t it.
make that Jane Austen (apoligies again, Jane)
Kevin Rudd 2007: “We will maintain the existing private health rebates”
Kevin Rudd 2009: slashes private health rebates.
http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2009/05/08/2565158.htm
There will always be free choice in this country. To each his own.
GP said:
Wrong. The last thing people need is a Government taking the country into an unnecessary war. That is the worst crime a leader can inflict on his own people. Unemployment and the economy come further back in the scale of importance.
510 oh you have cut us to the quick there Patrick.
Yep. Rudd is a prick to work for. Ok, let’s vote him out of office so Turnbull (who is also “allegedly” an arogant condesending boss) can be PM.
What next – you going to say Rudd offends you because you read somewehere that a Liberal MP said he got stroppy over a hairdryer in Afghanistan?
No 498
But if you accept that as the truth, then surely the same criticism must be levelled at Rudd for continuing to slash tax in this year’s budget and increase spending to stratospheric levels.
More double standards and hypocrisy.
Howard made it so that companies with less than 100 employees could sack anyone at any time without reason. It’s the reason why my company sacked 10 employees to get them down to 98 employees.
Yeah, what a great job-creating plan for Australia!
Tony Abbott 2004: The Government will retain the Medicare Safety Net in its current form, it is a “rock-solid, iron-clad” guarantee.
Tony Abbot 2005: “About 400,000 patients are expected to lose out when the tighter Medicare safety net provisions take effect next year, the Health Minister, Tony Abbott, revealed.”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/PM-Abbott-sorry-about-Medicare/2005/04/15/1113509928257.html
Both politicians. Both broke promises. (Will I ever recover???)
Bringing in GST was a good policy. Means testing health care is a good policy.
No 501
Yes, they think it’s all a media beatup.
The thing is, never in 12 years did we hear of similar antics from John Howard.
But what about Howard?
You’ll criticise Labor but not Liberal.
And must I repeat it again?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25498284-5013871,00.html
I agree there shouldn’t be any tax cuts next financial year or the one after.
But that STILL doesn’t stop Howard from being the most irresponsible spending Prime Minister ever. He spent during a boom as if we were in a recession, which is the complete opposite of what Governments should do.
There were always more double standards and hypocrisy under Howard.
No 510
Reasonable response Grog. The thing is, you can’t have reasoned debate when ShowsOn posits moronic statements like “Mr Never Ever”.
The fact that John Howard went to an election on the GST and won still eludes him.
bob 1234 says: “Howard made it so that companies with less than 100 employees could sack anyone at any time without reason. It’s the reason why my company sacked 10 employees to get them down to 98 employees.” blah blah blah etc etc.
Wrong. Those employees and your company signed employment contracts. Both parties were bound to act according to argreements. The workplace is not anarchy – as much unionists think it is.
No, we just heard that Howard would have massive mood swings based on the opinion polls:
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2009/s2556431.htm
That’s because of a fawning media who were as starry eyed of their hero as a Teenaged Monkees Fan
WHAT! Are you seriously saying Howard said we would NEVER EVER have a GST? And that he never said it was DEAD and BURIED at the last [1993) election? Stop lying.
The agreements were also dodgy. But the company’s aim was to get themselves under the magic 100.
GP wrote :
” The thing is, never in 12 years did we hear of similar antics from John Howard.”
Hewson is on the record about the tantrums howard used to throw
Most people that election voted against the Coalition.
Rubbish.
The nation’s finances were the BEST in the WESTERN WORLD. Rudd and Co could not have hoped for a better set of numbers to begin their first term.
Oh and what about abbott getting howard walking each morning in order to get him off the bottle ??
I’ll try not to make a habit of it GP
No 521
Of course, Hewson is completely oblivious that he is invoking a cynical self-parody. Hewson is the king of tantrums. Do we not all remember the filth he spilled all over the Fairfax papers a few months ago?
Hewson is the least authoritative person on alleged Howard tantrums.
Anyways, I’ll stop by later when the newspoll comes out tonight.
I reckon there will be two possible general responses eminating from this blog:
If Labor’s vote declines: “ROGUE POLL!”
If Labor’s vote increases or remains the same: “RUDD IS GOD”! / “THE LIBERALS’ BUDGET STANCE IS IN TATTERS!” / “THE EDUCATION REVOLUTION HAS ARRIVIED” etc.
We also exported the most minerals per person. What’s your point?
Here’s a pearler:
http://business.smh.com.au/business/libs-magic-pudding-years-20090403-9qjm.html
No 522
Ah, you still can’t accept reality that the Coalition won the 1998 election. Geez, and you all talk about me living in a fantasy world unable to accept reality.
Everyone accepts that the coalition won a majority of seats on 49% of the two-party vote.
Incorrect. The budget was in structural deficit, that’s why we would’ve been in deficit in the next financial year even if the government hadn’t spent any money.
Incorrect. Inflation was far too high, because of the Howard government’s profligate spending.
Actually they could have. Read Geroge M. Yes the numbers were “good”, but given the mining boom, they should have been better. And that is the point that the Libs can’t run away from.
But to be honest, it doesn’t matter. Most voters don’t read George M or watch Insiders, and the arugment is a hard one to convince people who get their news from a paper that draws Rudd as Wolverine.
Are the Liberal supporters lurking around tonight waiting for Newspoll and hoping to observe a Liberal budget bounce that will probably appear the day after Godot arrives?
GP
That would be the “I won’t live in the Lodge” John Howard? Nice little hissy fit that drained the taxpayer’s purse for the whole of his term. Makes a hairdryer or meal look like small beer indeed.
This is correct.
I actually agree with GP on that one. At least Howard admitted he lied (sort of) and then gave the people the chance to vote him out for it. The GST was a huge part of that election and he won it. I dunno how he ever won an election with a platform of a big new tax on everything but he did. God Labor must have been terrible that year.
The nation had money in the bank. No net debt. A $20 billion surplus. Really, those are dream numbers for a new government.
It’s only now, after all the irresponsible spending, that Labor is blaming the Coalition. Well how convenient.
They would’ve been better if the Costello had enough guts to stop Howard from spending, or at least spend money on infrastructure instead of hand outs.
Diogenes,
Introduce creepy music………
Meg Lees.
More rubbish. Inflation was at 3% when Rudd assumed office.
Also, more hypocrisy and double standards given that this government’s extreme spending record.
Not if the budget is in structural deficit, uninsured against a downturn in taxation revenue.
Incorrect. Labor campaigned strongly during 2007 on the theme that the government was wasting the proceeds of the mining boom. $200+ million in ONE YEAR on advertising for example.
And WA Voters beware, Adele Carles may be WA’s answer to Ms Lees if Colin needs to buy her vote
As the old saying goes, beware of sheep in Sheep’s Clothing.
irresponsible spending without which we still would have had a deficit of $25.6 billion this year.
Riddle me the explanation to that one GP.
No 535
How does it “drain” the taxpayer’s purse any more than any other Member of Parliament who has to fly long distances to get to Canberra? In any event, Canberra is only 50 minutes away from Sydney – it’s hardly an impost.
And speaking of tantrums, we never heard of Howard abusing his staff for trivalities like meals and hairdryers. Howard wasn’t nearly as conceited as Rudd.
We are in a RECESSION! You are saying that Howard’s policy was appropriate for being in a recession, when the economy was GROWING! Hypocrisy!
He was just an economic dunce.
Costello stood at the dispatch box and delivered the Budget, he can wear the blame as well – after all Howard (decervedly) gets blamed for Fraser’s economic faults.
Is it necessarily a lie to change your mind? We’ll leave that to philosophers, but Howard did the right thing and went to an election. He won against all odds and three times thereafter. It’s time to put “never ever” to bed.
What was the budget surplus that Howard delivered in 07 and what was it, that Rudd delivered in 08? Howards economic legacy has been exposed by the GFC.
The Howard government’s spending was based on the boom times continuing forever and was therefore UNSUSTAINABLE! Face it Patrick Fogarty, it’s not rocket science or brain surgery.
It is that unsustainability in spending which has resulted in a deficit, and the neo liberal ideology which has caused the GFC which has resulted in necessary debt.
No 549
three times thereafter = two times thereafter.
He SAID IT! The word NEVER has a meaning that we don’t require a philosopher to parse.
Well the hairdryer story is based on the report of a LIberal MP, so it’s patently bull.
You may be right about Howard not being conceited. All I know is my “spies” tell me the protective staff much more enjoy the new tennants of the Lodge.
I note with a smile that GP glazed over my previous post on the last page admitting that in the latter half of the Howard government, they believed in magic pudding economics.
$200 million is small change by Rudd’s recent spendathons.
ShowsOn, you are a hopeless hypocrite.
Like Howard, G.P. believes in government stimulus spending during booms. He has to defend Howard’s absurd economic policies because he can’t admit Howard could do something wrong.
Daily? With a helicopter transfer to Sydney airport? Not to mentioned the rejigged security arrangements, staffing etc.
There will always be weird people under the heaven as shown by 4Corners.
Politicians would like to believe it’s not.
The public perhaps has a different view.
What usually happens is whenever a politician brekas a promise his/her supporters, like the devil citing scripture for his own purpose, cite Keyne’s statement of:
The Howard government should’ve been cutting spending and / or increasing taxes to curb inflation, instead it spent, spent, and spent, which forced the reserve bank to put up interest rates 6 times in 2007 alone.
Comments like this prove that you have absolutely no explanation for John Howard’s irresponsible and economically reckless spending in his last two terms.
But even when Tony Abbott admits it was all bull?
Bob, I have never walked away from the fact that some of the spending in the last term of the Howard Government was irresponsible.
That said, they left the nation’s finances in great shape compared to what they were in 1996 with Keating’s secret black hole.
Even abbott has admitted to the libs believing in magic pudding spending
where’s that quote from bob1234? (I wish to bookmark it!)
G.P. works like this:
1) Whatever John Howard says or does is right.
2) John Howard spent far too much during a boom.
3) Spending too much money during a boom is good.
GP: Still waiting for you to explain the stimulis free deficit of $25.6 billion for this year.
Any predictions for newspoll tonight?
I hope the MSM get a big bang for their pre-budget liberal party propaganda.
I’ll go 2PP 54/46
PPM 62/22
You haven’t a foot to stand on given the travel arrangements of the current Government:
http://au.messages.yahoo.com/news/politics/476029/
In any event, I have no problem with the Prime Minister’s travel arrangments. Even when the Coalition was criticising Rudd’s travel I declined to criticise. It is part and parcel of the job. If the PM feels more comfortable living in Sydney, so be it. In Canberra, so be it. He’s the PM for goodness sake.
You mean like giving people one off payments when inflation was already at the upper end of the RBA’s target range?
A black hole that would’ve been a surplus just 18 months later than what Costello achieved by cutting money from health and education.
Grog, the article link is on the previous page.
And when Abbott is talking about believing in magic pudding economics, how can one interpret that as wasteful spending? He was clearly meaning that a $20b surplus wasn’t a result of magic Howard economics, rather a mining boom.
Remember, Menzies never delivered a surplus. The first Liberal surplus came from McMahon, when there was a *gasp* mining boom!
The Lodge was built as the Prime Minister’s official residence. That is where they should live. If they don’t want to live there, they should go back to being a failed lawyer.
Menzies understood that governments should build public infrastructure, the Howard government felt the only public good was handing out cash during a boom in order to get re-elected. They never considered the effect this would have on inflation and interest rates.
Inflation was within the target range for the majority of the Howard years. In fact, it was 3% when Howard left office.
The “inflation genie” was a myth, and you know it.
Obviously Kevin doesn’t believe it, because he’s spending like money’s going out of fashion. $100 billion in new spending in just eight months. Extraordinary.
If he genuinely believed it at the time he said “Never ever” it’s not a lie. It was more of a mistake. Even if he was recklessly indifferent to whether it was going to be true, it’s still not a lie.
His stance on the GST never bothered me. Plenty of other things did though.
GG
I always thought it was funny that Meg Lees and the Dems were killed off due to their GST support and Howard sailed through it. It’s a great lesson in not shafting you base.
I’m sure you will be understanding when the Greens vote against the ETS.
Tell this to the board of the Reserve Bank of Australia. Here’s their email address:
rbainfo@rba.gov.au
Just like John Howard, you fail to understand that governments should pursue different fiscal policies depending on if the economy is growing and contracting.
Just like Malcolm Turnbull, you seem to be unable to differentiate between temporary and ongoing budget expenditure.
No 571
It’s a mere tradition. Kirribilli House is an official residence as well. Who actually cares?
Honestly, if I were criticising Rudd for constantly flying overseas, you’d be rightly refuting my claims. There’s no difference here, except you continue to reveal your rank hypocrisy.
Neither can you, since you are implicity endorsing the tax cuts Wayne Swan handed down last Tuesday.
I oppose them. Malcolm Turnbull is the one who is conveniently ignoring them so he can continue his argument that middle class families should subsidise the private health insurance of millionaires. Of course this is a policy that you support as well.
Gosh, things are moving so quickly here. Dave back at 522 wrote:
I would like a link to this information please, if anyone can help.
GP
Inflation on a year to year basis hit 4.0% in March 2006 and 3.9% in June 2006. Imagine what it would have been without the interest rate hikes.
OK, GP point to ONE incident where the Minsiter should not have gone. Just ONE.
C’mon. How about Garrett – his was the most expensive trip. He went to Chile. It was for the INternaitonal Whaling Commission. What did you want him to do? Hitch hike there? DO you think he chose the location??
C’mon ante up. Criticise ONE trip as being an irresponsible waste of the taxpayer’s money. Criticise ONE trip as being outside the Minister’s remit.
All I know is, had Howard won in 07, he’d be off to England in a month’s time for a high powered meeting.
The Ashes being on would be completely coincidental…
Diogs,
Howard went to the election on the GST and cannot be held culpable for Lees herding the lemming like Democrats over a precipice.
I can well remember neighbours and acquaintances telling me how glad they were that the Democrats were there to stop the GST.
Some of them still can’t look me in the eye.
Libs’ ‘magic pudding’ years
Jacob Saulwick, Sydney Morning Herald, 4 April 2009
http://business.smh.com.au/business/libs-magic-pudding-years-20090403-9qjm.html
Of course it matters. The British PM doesn’t live at Checkers.
Imagine if Obama said, you know Camp David is a better place to live, I think we’ll stay there unless I need to be in Washington.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/18/2574086.htm?section=justin
Obviously Malcolm is not as comfortable as Steve when caught between a rocs and a hard place, or two rocks and a hard place, or whatever that place is now.
http://www.rba.gov.au/ChartPack/inflation_wage_measures.pdf
Doubt it, GP.
No 581
Grog, as I said in the rest of my post, I don’t have a problem with PM travel. That’s just the nature of their job. In most cases, the same goes for Ministers, though I’m less willing to cut them the same amount of slack.
Kirribilli House has been an official residence since 1956:
http://www.pm.gov.au/australia/government/residences.cfm
Nice try, but remember, G.P. doesn’t accept facts.
I cut them no slack.
I don’t cut Rudd any slack either. He hasn’t gone anywhere for no reason yet.
Fact is, the hoops Ministers have to go through to get apporval for overseas travel means they don’t go anywhere unless they absolutely can prove they need to.
They don’t just get on a plane for the hell of it.
No one is disputing it. But where’s the capital of the nation??
If you don’t want to live in Canberra, then don’t apply for the job of being PM.
Typical undergrad, really.
Cuppa
I have seen hewson on sky Nooz on several occasions taking about howards tantrums.
It was usually in the context of a labor figure have bad publicity of a similar nature.
No 590
Grog, more rubbish.
In any event, the Australian people couldn’t care less. They re-elected him three times and his residing in Sydney was not a reason for his loss in 2007.
In addition to howard living at kirribilli was the huge additional cost of the RAAF jet taxi service backwards and forwards to canberra
Ian McPhedran, Herald Sun, 19 September 2007:
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22442707-662,00.html
GP, do you really expect us to believe that the profligate spending of Howard did not produce a corresponding increase in inflation?
This is inaccurate. Kirribilli House has been an official residence of the PM since 1956. The implication is otherwise in that article.
No, it was his economic incompetence that did him in. The economy was booming, but people couldn’t see it with run down health and education sectors, and no action on climate change.
G.P., just so you know, we are talking about The Lodge which is in Canberra.
Cuppa it just added further to the waste of his wasted years.
Good news week guy: “If a bomb goes off, and Rudd can’t get to his new bunker quick enough, all he has to do is hide behind Joe Hockey.”
No 599
Just so you know, there’s nothing wrong with a PM residing in Kirribilli House. If you think there is, you’re out of touch with Australians.
G.P. thinks that when Liberals spend, that money comes from trees. But when Labor government’s spend, that is stolen from rich people or borrowed from foreign governments.
GP,
Your Howard love knows absolutely no bounds. Keep it up! I love the focus on a has been who ain’t coming back.
It seems William Bowe himself predicts big things for the Greens, probably to the despair of Laborites on here. And the ABC’s Antony Green reckons that the Greens will retain Freo at the next election. What better people could we turn to for their opinion? Checkmate.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/05/18/freo-by-election-the-beginning-of-big-things-for-the-greens/
Oh yeah, it was the burning issue of every election. What a purile statment.
Poeple won’t vote Rudd out of office because he got stroppy at the air stewardess – doens’t make him right.
Your devotion to your former leader borders on the Animal Farm levels. Like Boxer you cannot move from “John Howard is always right”.
LOL! Guess what G.P., I AM AN AUSTRALIAN, and Phillip Ruddock and Amanda Vanstone are no longer in charge of the department of immigration, which means I can’t be deported.
lateline announced newspoll yet?
That inflation was a real problem in early 2008 is evidenced by ABS data that sees it go from 3.0% in the December quarter 2007 to 5.0% in the September quarter 2008.
Dave, thanks, I’ll keep an eye out. Centre, wasted is right. Wasted boom, wasted decade.
Gotta love the justice that rewarded Howard with 10 interest rate rises in a row in response to his inflationary profligacy, which gave the emphasis to the Coalition 2004 election lie: to keep interest rates at record lows.
Bob if the Greens don’t eventually support Labor’s CPRS they will no longer be relevant. They will forever be considered as an extremest party.
Bob,
William also predicted a Labor win on Saturday.
As always, the Greens cherry picking the news that suits.
I think that when push comes to shove, they will belatedly support it.
No 607
What a crying shame.
Very selective reading of the history of Kirribilli House, GP.
http://www.theaustralianafund.org.au/kirribilli.html
It was intended to be used by the PM when he needed to perform official duties and extend official hospitality when in Sydney. To suggest that it was simply an alternative accommodation to the lodge is to rewrite history, and to ignore the hue and cry that occured when Howard (or was it Jeanette?) through the hissy fit over having to live at the lodge.
I don’t think they will, but it’s definitely not going to make them irrelevant. Voting for a crap policy because Labor’s only argument is “It’s better than nothing” is what will make them irrelevant.
Your hatred of democracy is un-Australian.
It doesnt start for another hour…
I agree with this.
The Greens can only support the CPRS if they can “improve” it. Nothing to be gained for them voting for it as is.
(Though that statement possibly completely contradicts previous statements made by me on the subject!)
OK Oz, reject it, and give all your preferences to the liberals so you can have a better ETS under them LOL.
No 617
It’s more a hatred of morons.
GG
From dim memory, the rest of the Dem Senators voted with Lees and Howard. I assume Howard needed more than just Lees’ vote and the other Dems could have saved their Party but didn’t.
Play nice GP, you are as liable as any of us here to make statements covered in idiocy, no need to get personal.
Grog,
While Oz and Bob get their messages from Greens HO straight, it’s more likely the Libs will support the ETS. Therefore, the Greens will be left out on the limb playing the banjo of irrelevant deliverance.
No more extremist than the Liberals. I’ve seen a graph of where on the L-R spectrum people perceive the parties to be. The Liberals were perceived as being further to the right than the Greens are to the left.
Diog,
I don’t think Natasha the Scot Destroyer supported it.
Dio
read andrew bartletts blog
quite enlightning re gst harradine etc
Morons are part of democracy too, how else could you explain Phillip Ruddock and Amanda Vanstone becoming immigration ministers?
You’re working at full speed tonight G.P.!
#622, is your nappy too tight tonight?
How embarrasing for the Greens GG. To have an ETS determined by Labor with support from the Liberals. It will be yes indeed. Who needs the Greens?
I read that as mormons
Finns,
GP and friends should be talking more about the lessons they learnt, than the morons they are.
Not if they don’t support the ETS Cuppa @ 626.
Agreed GG, but I don’t think that will hurt them. Nothing to be gained form the Greens being seen to suport a ETS that the Liberal Party is happy with.
They’re not ever going to be the second party in the country, so it’s best for them to be seen as strong on the one issue their voters want them to be strong on.
The only risk for the Greens is that the Libs don’t support the policy, and thus we get nothing. Their voters might think something is better than nothing.
So ideally the Libs suport it, and the Greens can play the “it’s a bad polciy and we need your vote to improve it” card.
If the ETS doesn’t go through, they are left holding the “You voted for us to get an ETS, but we voted for nothing rather than perfection” card.
So all in all, some big stakes poker is getting played at the moment.
I think Bartlett & NSD were the 2 Dems that voted against it (of 7)
Finns
I was going to ask someone else the same thing last night
lol Dario, trying to keep the eyes open and shooing the teens off to bed so I can watch it. 3 polls in 24hrs, trying to speed read 6 pages of PB and read Poss’s latest post…there’s alot going on.
Diog, with John Huntsman. All i have to say is beware of a Mormon bearing gifts or knocking on my front door (i usually just tell them to farq off):
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/KE16Ae02.html
Grog,
My guess is the legislation will be rejected first time around and the Government will re introduce to present as a DD triggger around September.
It is then that the Libs have to make a call. Libs will not want to fight an election on anything but the economy because, strange as it might sound, that is their only hope of winning.
Certainly NSD did. Her finest hour. I don’t remember whether the Pear did or not. No doubt he will come and tell us.
What a pity NSD came into politics too young, and for the Silly Party. She left just as she was developing into a mature politician. She’s only 39 even now, plenty of time to make a comeback if she can find a more sensible party…
Yes Grog, big stakes poker is at play here, and I reckon the Greens are going to lose if they are not seen as responsible enough to ever make an agreement with a major party on their very core issue.
GG, are the Libs going to run on interest rates always being lower under a coalition government?
http://www.rba.gov.au/ChartPack/interest_rates_australia.pdf
It was Mrs Bucket who insisted on living in Sydney. Little Johnnie simply did as he was told.
The Democrats were a great party during it’s heyday… but would never win over the vote of extreme right wingers such as yourself.
steve,
They’d run under orgasms are better under a coalition if they thought they could win.
As said previously, I think the GST is good policy, but it was absolutely the wrong move politically for the Democrats.
And given the Dem’s are gone the stigma of coming back for the ALP wouldn’t be as bad as it was for Kernot.
I voted for NSD for the president of the Adelaide Uni Student Association back in 90 (or 91?). Incedentally she used her initials on all her campaign posters.
GG,
Orgasms are always better under the Labor because it offers more stimulus.
There’ll always be more orgasms under a Labor government.
Because everyone knows Liberal supporters can’t get any.
Except when John Howards starts talking about Workchoices
Finns,
You understand economics. Stimulus first, orgasm later.
Like their education policy, if they can’t get any based on merit, they just pay for it.
You could be right. This is certainly the Green’s GST moment.
As I have said previously on other threads the big difference is the majroity of Dem’s supporters did not want a GST, whereas all the Greens supporters want a ETS (or something). So the trick is working out do they want a flawed ETS, or nothing.
Best casse for them is they get the ALP to “improve it”. But I can;t see why Rudd would do that, given that would mean also having to herd the two cats of Xena and Fielding. Much better for him to put it all on the head of Turnbull.
Sorry Amigo, i got it wrong way around. No wonder the missus has not been happy with me lately. Must try harder and better.
Self-stimulus doesn’t count.
Actually bob I voted for Janet Powell in 1987 and Sid Spindler in 1990. I decided I wouldn’t vote for them again after they sided with the extreme left in opposing the first Gulf War, a just war endorsed by the UN.
Grog,
It’s the Republican debate all over again.
Get on board the only train going or sit around waiting for a better option.
Am not particularly fussed if the Greens want to play or not.
I don’t seem to recall a downturn in orgasms since Rudd’s ascendancy.
Finns,
Harder is best!
I can’t see the Greens agreeing to any carbon scheme, or tax or whatever. Being able to bitch and moan about the major parties raping the earth is their raison d’etre.
The Libs can’t tell the difference between an orgasm and an organism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MqbGJVaIbY
That would be my play GG. Vote for it, but make it clear that it needs improving – and then seek a “mandate” to do so.
I’ve always argued that it’s easier to improve a system than bring in a new one.
Grog
I hope the ETS passes, although it’s a terrible policy.
At the same time, I often vote Green and I hope they vote against it, even if it means it dies in the Senate. The 10% or so of people who vote Green aren’t doing so for them to support a climate change policy that Howard could have written.
There is a perverted logic in there.
So if Iraq was endorsed by the UN you’d have supported that?
The Gulf War was not the right thing to do. It seems only the independents Ted Mack and Phil Cleary had a conscience in the lower house. Everyone else was morally bankrupt.
That’s because you can’t get your hand off it.
Diog, this a family blog.
Back then when I was at uni, I went along in a protest march against the War. Was not against the war at all, just wanted to be in a protest march. Think about half way down North Tce, I decided to stop and grab a coffee.
And thus ended my tperiod as a left wing radical.
So even when the U.N. security council votes for a war, you still don’t think it is justified?
Can you at least be honest and say that you would NEVER support a war under ANY circumstance?
lol, Swan got asked who he’d prefer as Liberal leader, Turnbull or Costello. Swan replies “same horse different jockey”
The UN not supporting it was a pretty major point bob.
The First Iraq War was the right thing to do – Iraq invaded Kuawit. What else was the rest of the world supposed to do?
Hi Gus, here’s the info you were asking about last night.
HISTORY AUSTRALIA, VOLUME 3, NUMBER 1, 2006 MONASH UNIVERSITY EPRESS
publications.epress.monash.edu/doi/pdf/10.2104/ha060010
Relevant quote is –
“While reformers such as Don Dunstan wanted a multiracial and multicultural Australia, others,
such as Fred Daly and Arthur Calwell, defended the White Australia policy. Neither Calwell nor
Daly felt bound by the party platform. In 1971, Whitlam was obliged to sack Daly as immigration
spokesman over comments that endorsed the White Australia policy.”
There is also reference to this on Wiki but thought you might like something more substantial.
I don’t want to start the debate again but thought you’d like to know.
The UN doesn’t have a monopoly on what is right.
It depends on the circumstances, but I’d have to see a very solid reason, like an imminent war on home soil.
And who gave Iraq weapons to do so?
Japan certainly doesn’t do things by halves. Technically, the WHO has to increase it’s pandemic level to 6 now, making swine flu a full pandemic. I’ll be interested to see if they do. The mortality rate still is only about 1%.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25503956-5005962,00.html
Not long now.. just want to hear so I can go to bed!
I wonder how many of the 10% or so Greens voters would be prepared to vote for a Greens ETS over a Labor ETS which contain economic realities?
I’d say 3% tops!
Interesting Howard interview at the Hoover Institute. Better than the Spears interview I think.
http://fora.tv/2009/04/23/Uncommon_Knowledge_John_Howard
And if they release them tomorrow morning rather than tonight? Or do their once in a blue moon poll skips? You’ll be up a long time
Dio they were talking about that on Newsradio this morning. The belief is that the phrase “pandemic” has such bad connotations that they don’t want to do it.
People think pandemic means deaths a plenty, and not the WHO definition.
There are so many conflicting interests in that forum that if the security council endorses a military intervention, then it is pretty well an open and shut case.
OK, so your only reason for support a war was say, if Australia was attacked like in World War II.
Other than that, our foreign policy should be completely isolationist?
lol, you’re dreaming.
Don’t toy with me bob!!!!
Winston
Wilhelm would ban me ( or even worse, use one of his pithy putdowns) if I even dared respond
but tanks anyway
Irrelevant. Just because a country has weapons doesn’t mean they should invade other countries.
As I said, it depends on the circumstances. But I do not believe Vietnam, the Gulf War, or Iraq were warranted.
The US were idiots to give the dictator weapons in the first place. Then they decide to invade the country they armed. Well done.
BTW i’m not here to start debating the pros and cons of various wars. I’ve stated my opinion as have others. I don’t care to get in to long protracted debates on it.
BRING ON NEWSPOLL!!!
So what. That is the fault of the USA (And Russia et al). It didn’t give Iraq a free pass to violate international borders, and it didn’t mean the US (or Russia et al) were not allowed to defend a nation whose borders had been invaded.
Gus, you mean Herr Wilhelm? sigh, in addition to Herr Doktor?
No worries Bob – it is pretty old history anyway.
They’ll only hold off on a late release if the results are bad for the Liberals.
So that means you are endorsing the right of countries to unilaterally invade each other.
These aren’t explanations for why it was wrong for a U.N. force to invade Iraq after Iraq had invaded Kuwait.
They’re probably letting Oz journalists get their articles in order for a maximum of spin.
Oh cuppa you old conspiracy theorist!!
Actually if they had been really good, there would have been a chance they would have got a mention on Sky’s agenda.
May 19 Newspoll says 56 to 44
where’d you get that SHows ON?
Voting intention:
http://www.mumble.com.au/federal/newspoll0905201.pdf
Budget questions:
http://www.mumble.com.au/federal/newspoll090520_budg.pdf
I got these from http://www.mumble.com.au
Grog
As you say, you can have a pandemic in which no-one dies. There’s an awful lot of politics in this whole swine flu thing. Still, their definition says level 6 is when two continents have shown sustained human-to-human transmission and we have that now.
Sweet
Finns
when the kaiser speaks we all listen
even when no-ones listening
I hope that Newspoll is unchanged or better for Labor. It will serve Costello right for jumping in so quickly on a single ACNielsen poll and making an ass of himself.
ALP primaries up 4, Libs down 1. All good.
The Soviet Union and France, overwhelmingly.
Cheers ShowsON, top work
Big drop for Rudd in the satisfied – 64-58.
Turnbull stays negative – 40-42 (I got that one right!)
Newspoll 56/44 at http://www.mumble.com.au
HAHAAH NEWSPOLL 56/44 stuff that up your clackers GP, Glen, Bree, Costello, and all you other Liberal hacks!
Well, the Essential Research poll is certainly worthless then.
So another rogue Nielsen poll then.
Rudd on Lateline.
All the polls have had some very wierd numbers this week. ER with an improvement for the government but poor numbers on the budget, ACN with poor numbers for the government but good budget numbers, and Newspoll with ALP primaries up but Kevs numbers down. Very, very odd.
Pretty lame considering it seems Fairfax can only afford to do 3 a year now.
Newspoll will always be better for Labor.
The only thing common in all polls is Rudd’s satisfaction rating is down, but still generally quite high.
All polls except for the actual election are rogue.
Not at all. A slight swing upward, just like Newspoll.
Suck it up GP!
New thread.
The most salient factor in all the recent polls is a significant reduction in Rudd’s popularity versus the previous stratospheric support.
Maybe he needs another overseas trip. It always helps his popularity. His only problems occur when he comes back.