<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Reuters Poll Trend: 56.6-43.4</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/</link>
	<description>Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:20:35 +1100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: William Bowe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276453</link>
		<dc:creator>William Bowe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:14:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276453</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/22/morgan-58-42545-455/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;New thread&lt;/a..&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/22/morgan-58-42545-455/" rel="nofollow">New thread</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Bruce</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276452</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Bruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:14:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276452</guid>
		<description>[Morgan’s face-to-face had the Libs primary up 3.5 this week.]
So? To what?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Morgan’s face-to-face had the Libs primary up 3.5 this week.</p></blockquote>
<p>So? To what?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Bruce</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276451</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Bruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:13:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276451</guid>
		<description>I can tell you what all of the recognised polls tell us now, Labor would still win easily. A point overlooked by the MSM.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can tell you what all of the recognised polls tell us now, Labor would still win easily. A point overlooked by the MSM.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Yo ho ho</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276450</link>
		<dc:creator>Yo ho ho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:12:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276450</guid>
		<description>[The only poll to have Labor well down and the Libs well up of Nielsen. What does that tell us?]

Morgan&#039;s face-to-face had the Libs primary up 3.5 this week.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>The only poll to have Labor well down and the Libs well up of Nielsen. What does that tell us?</p></blockquote>
<p>Morgan&#8217;s face-to-face had the Libs primary up 3.5 this week.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greensborough Growler</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276449</link>
		<dc:creator>Greensborough Growler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:11:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276449</guid>
		<description>Gary,

The Nielsen was within MOE with the other polls. So, although it looks out, it&#039;s more a polloptical illusion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gary,</p>
<p>The Nielsen was within MOE with the other polls. So, although it looks out, it&#8217;s more a polloptical illusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Bruce</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276448</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Bruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:09:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276448</guid>
		<description>&quot;of&quot; - should be &quot;is&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;of&#8221; &#8211; should be &#8220;is&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ltep</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276447</link>
		<dc:creator>ltep</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:09:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276447</guid>
		<description>I was referring to the Federal Parliament.  As religion isn&#039;t a head of power given to the Commonwealth the states can essentially legislate in any way they like in relation to religion that doesn&#039;t violate their own Constitutions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was referring to the Federal Parliament.  As religion isn&#8217;t a head of power given to the Commonwealth the states can essentially legislate in any way they like in relation to religion that doesn&#8217;t violate their own Constitutions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Bruce</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276446</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Bruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:09:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276446</guid>
		<description>The only poll to have Labor well down and the Libs well up of Nielsen. What does that tell us?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only poll to have Labor well down and the Libs well up of Nielsen. What does that tell us?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Psephos</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276445</link>
		<dc:creator>Psephos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:06:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276445</guid>
		<description>Finns, you really are a total &lt;i&gt;(SNIP for language)&lt;/i&gt; sometimes. To attribute someone&#039;s personal characteristics to their racial origins is by definition racist - what else does the word mean? Try the sentence &quot;Dick Pratt was a Polish Jew - they&#039;re the most dishonest and cheat people a lot&quot;, and see how far you get. It&#039;s at exactly the same level of idiocy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Finns, you really are a total <i>(SNIP for language)</i> sometimes. To attribute someone&#8217;s personal characteristics to their racial origins is by definition racist &#8211; what else does the word mean? Try the sentence &#8220;Dick Pratt was a Polish Jew &#8211; they&#8217;re the most dishonest and cheat people a lot&#8221;, and see how far you get. It&#8217;s at exactly the same level of idiocy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ShowsOn</title>
		<link>http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/05/21/reuters-poll-trend-566-434/comment-page-9/#comment-276444</link>
		<dc:creator>ShowsOn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 05:04:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=3614#comment-276444</guid>
		<description>[I’d imagine they couldn’t ban religions either.]
Victoria banned Scientology for a decade or so.

In South Australia the Scientology e-meter device was banned for a time because Scientology promoted it as a medical device.

Aspects of religions are regulated, it would be nothing new to take a few more steps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I’d imagine they couldn’t ban religions either.</p></blockquote>
<p>Victoria banned Scientology for a decade or so.</p>
<p>In South Australia the Scientology e-meter device was banned for a time because Scientology promoted it as a medical device.</p>
<p>Aspects of religions are regulated, it would be nothing new to take a few more steps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
