Adelaide’s News Limited Sunday tabloid, the Sunday Mail, today carries a poll with a small sample of 483 showing state Labor with a two-party lead of 64-36 among Adelaide voters. Remarkable as that might sound, Antony Green calculates it’s in the same ballpark as the 2006 election, when the Adelaide two-party result was 62.6-37.4. Antony further observes that the Sunday Mail article absurdly compares this purely metropolitan result with the statewide two-party figure from 2006 to conjure a 7 per cent Labor swing that would cost the Liberals eight of their 14 seats. In reality, the poll points to a roughly status quo result, although that’s quite bad enough for the Liberals given the scale of Labor’s win in 2006.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Sunday Mail: 64-36 to SA Labor in Adelaide
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
271 Comments
SNIP: Offensive comment deleted – The Management.
Surely that’s a first. Getting the first post snipped for being offensive.
Dodgy poll or not – SA Liberals to get “pounded” at next years election.
Also, one for Antony – you put Dunstan’s success down to Liberal infighting. Was there really any difference in the state of the Liberals when comparing the 1977 and 1979 elections? Look at the drubbing Labor got in 1979. Sure there were reasons for that, but it takes a lot to go from a 53% 2PP to a 45% 2PP.
I used the five-letter word starting with R. In hindsight maybe I shouldn’t have used it.
Recalling news reports from the time, one of the reasons the ALP lost in 1979 was that a snap transport strike occurred midday on the day before the election. In the days when strikes occurred a lot more often than today, it was the last straw for many voters. There was probably also that Des Corcoran couldn’t maintain the Dunstan momentum – though I don’t think Don Dunstan was too popular by the end of his rule.
Does anybody know why Des Corcoran went early in 1979?
It’s not just the dodgy documents that has caused this. It’s the talk of a leadership spill, I mean why would the voters want MHS if his own party doesn’t want him.
The Ruddster also gave Rann a free kick with the extra dosh for the desal plant which has partly neutralised the Water topic (along with it being winter and everyone having nice gardens now) which was Rann’s worst area. The election will be held in March when our brown dirt gardens will again remind us that we have no water.
I heard from a well-placed source that the Libs looked around three weeks ago to dump MHS but found all the alternatives were even worse, which is really saying something.
So Rann will be blamed for the lack of rainfall? That’s a bit harsh isn’t it?
Why did Des Corcoran go early in 1979?
One story is that while he was in bed sounding his wife Carmel out on the merits of an election, she misheard him and said yes.
GB
We can only water our gardens for 3 hours a week and you can only use a hose, no sprinklers. This is obviously too much of a pain to do so most of us have just let the lawn die.
We never get rain in summer and we’re completely dependent on sprinklers in summer.
The only people who blame Rann for the water issue are rusted on Liberals.
Wow this poll is bad. Badly done but equally bad for the liberals.
The reporting that the liberals are only one 23% is prolly the dodgiest bit, it ignores 14% of the undecided/refused. Why why does the advertiser not exclude them.. Not that 23/86*100 really is that much higher, but that combined with the dodgy metro/rural thing makes a bad poll look horrible.
Still as a labor man i’m not all that upset the advertiser is playing silly buggers with the polling for both sides.
Not even remotely true. I’m not a “rusted on Lib” and I do. Most South Aussies think Rann has missed the boat on Water. At least we can blame Penny Wong now for the endless front page stories about how we have no water.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1300&dat=19790824&id=0YkQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=1JIDAAAAIBAJ&pg=3217,3690061
Fascinating piece from The Age, three weeks before the 1979 election, talking about how Labor would romp it home and gain control of the upper house to boot…
Rann can’t make it rain.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25702717-5006301,00.html
HAHA
Gold. Pure gold.
Great stuff.
We need a dodgy documents scandal here in NSW to light a fire under the Libs.
Dio you’re talking to a Victorian. We also know about water restrictions.
So Rann failed to make it rain in the past? Is that the beef?
I hope Mitch Williams challenges … he has had some rather interesting opinions on water usage in the past …
Dio, you maybe right with this claim but where is your data showing this to be true?
Page has been moved.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25702722-5006301,00.html
One thing that Labor will need to be wary of is that Mitch Williams is a cleanskin, and in terms of looks, appears more leadershipish than his predecessors. I can’t say i’ve heard him debate however.
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200811/r317910_1411651.jpg
having worked in a number of different electorate I know that water is always comming up as an issue of concern, but besides wild lefties complaining about lack of action accross the board and for a long time in regards to the Murray, its not an issue that is going to bring down Rann.
Do people really think that rain is the be all and end all of water? They’ve never heard of water policy? Water resource management? We even have a Federal minister for water.
Tinkering at the edges is all that does.
Er, no.
Given the government has the power to determine how much water gets pulled out of the rivers and dams and who it goes to, it’s probably the biggest factor.
Yeah, and we know how much water is in the Murray…
And as for dams, where you do you think water comes from when the tap is turned on…?
Meanwhile…
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25700094-5006336,00.html
I certainly agree, but still, a big
for all those whingers who go on about Rann. Sure he’s not the best but hes far far far from the worst.
bob and GB
My wife has just written an essay on SA water policy (with help from zoomster). The “stick your head in the sand and say there’s no problem” approach hasn’t been the great success Rann would tell us. And Wong has been doing what she does best, which is
“Nuffin’, absolutely nuffin’”
Bob, I can guarantee you that you’ll be hard pressed to find any water expert in Australia that would condone current extraction, transportation and irrigation practices in Australia. We’ve been using water unsustainably for years – mainly due to the kinds of crops we grow, how we move our water from one place to the other, how we inefficiently use water throughout the community, where we source our water from (recycling and stormwater harvesting) and the inability to correctly price the resource. None of these are related to rainfall or drought and pretty much all of them are directly linked to government policy, or can be solved by government policy.
The drought of the last few years has accelerated our movement towards the “water crunch” but we were heading there pretty quickly without it.
I hope Hamilton-Smith hangs on, as I put on my Labor supporters hat.
Um The Rann Govt has lobbied and started to build a desal plant that supplies 50% of the states water. We can’t make it rain!
But Oz and dio, your solutions aren’t solutions, they will add some water back but not enough to solve the problem.
Hear hear!!!
The drought may be making things worse but climate change means it will probably never be as good as it once was. It is precisely because “we can’t make it rain” that we have to reduce extractions. That is tough because if irrigators have their water cut off that will cause hardship to the whole community.
But you can’t keep using what isn’t there and what one farmer uses means less for everyone else. So the sooner the federal govt starts making the difficult decisions about who goes and who stays the better. It should be based on dollar value made per litre of water required. That probably means no more rice! But it will also mean the most efficient and productive farmers stay.
Currently we are subsidising the agricultural industry with grossly under valued water supplies and then exporting it overseas. Other industries such as mining and manufacturing are far far more water efficient.
Bob1234:
Join the club, the moderator censored me the other day, I had no idea why.
Less than 5 years ago the dams along the Murray were virtually full.
The irrigators drained them and the river and the backwaters that are part of the river ecosystem in less than one year.
I don’t think people realize how much water irrigators use.
In SA, and the numbers and percentages are worse in the other Murray states, MOST of the water that flows down the river is used for irrigation.
And most of that is wasted in evaporation.
In a ‘normal’ year [if such a year exists any more] irrigators in SA use about 4 times the amount of Murray water that Adelaide uses. Thats a few thousand people compared to a million plus.
In drought years, such as recently, Adelaide’s need for Murray water increases and the ratio becomes about 3:1 with irrigators getting most.
By coincidence [?] the difference in usage of Murray water by Adelaide is about the proposed capacity of the desal plant [initially about 50,000,000,000 litres].
Which, just for initial outlay, will cost about $1.5 billion dollars.
What other uses could be made of that money?
A 10% decrease in irrigation along the Murray in SA would deliver more water to the city and to the river with virtually zero impact on local communities [the value of irrigation is vastly overrated] and even less on food prices [most food is grown elsewhere].
Most debate in the media and by pollies takes little or no notice of the harsh realities of the numbers and of the numerous reports that for years, nearly decades, have been telling pollies etc that the situation is due to over allocation of irrigation and barely related to rainfall. Drought merely exacerbates the underlying cause.
The cause of the plight of the Murray, particularly in SA has little to do with the drought, that is mainly a secondary factor.
If the next 5 years saw above average rainfalls [an extremely unlikely event, the CSIRO predictions are for permanently lower rainfalls in the future compared to the past] along the entire catchment area the impact on the environmental flows in the Murray would be minimal.
Irrigators would simply take the extra out of the river.
As has happened in the past few years.
Whenever extra water becomes available the river gets none or next to none and the irrigators get virtually all.
Their demand is insatiable.
Responsibility for this lies in several quarters.
The River Murray Commission, the state govts, the federal govts, the irrigation lobby, the media …..others
That includes Rann.
Back to the story…
I reckon we’ll see a Williams-Redmond ticket. Redmond is a dill but she’s only just slightly better than Chapman.
It’s funny how lately The Advertiser/Sunday Mail have turned against MHS. They were always against Iain Evans. They were quite anti-Labor when MHS looked half-competative.
The cynic within me suggests the poll was done for metro areas to give the “64-36 2pp” shocker and get Liberal MPs worked up enough to get behind a challenger. Low and behold, Mitch Williams steps up due to this poll, to give the Libs another stab at the 2010 election. Death by poll… lol.
I bet they’ll be anti-Labor once Williams takes over the leadership again.
fredex
Yeah, makes you realize how pathetic is the gesture of ‘buckets in the shower’ which the pollies have been pushing as a distraction from real issues. We can’t expect NSW and VIC govs do to the right thing so federal gov has to take responsibility and get serious. I for one am prepared to vote against Rudd over this and his other lack lustre green credentials.
(I should add that this post and my last one was written by Mrs D. Don’t shoot me, I’m just the messenger.)
bob
I think the papers know the Libs are stuffed under MHS and want a new leader to regain everyone’s interest (much the same reason as the OO got rid of Julie Bishop and Nelson).
I spoke to a few Libs this week about Williams and they all thought he was their best chance.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25702722-5006301,00.html
I agree with Mrs [or Ms?] Dio but unfortunately the problem we have is that the ‘other mob’ are even worse than Rudd/Wong etc who are at least vaguely aware of the problem.
Rann I’m not so sure about but the problem that the other mob are completely clueless applies there too.
The Libs, and the Nats even more so, are the major cause of the problem being the mouthpieces for the irrigation lobby.
I sit here on the Murray, I’m looking at it now, its just the other side of one of the dead lagoons along the Murray, and get amazed by the misinformation that is spread.
I can see, from where I am typing this, an irrigation area that uses currently, taking into account quotas, more water than a very large suburb in the city, thousands of houses. And employs a fraction of a percent of the workers in that suburb.
And there is a similar place to my left and one around the corner of the river.
Between they may employ a few hundred people directly and indirectly [and thats a very generous estimate], generate a few millions in export dollars and cut the price of a very limited range of food items [but more likely cause increases] by a fraction of a cent per litre or kilogram .
People in Adelaide probably don’t know that it costs a large tankful of water to make 1 litre of milk from irrigation, more water than a bucket in the shower in a family house could save in a year, just for 1 litre.Want to save a 1000 litres of Murray water?
Drink 1 less litre of milk produced by irrigation.
Or better still decrease production of irrigated milk by 1 litre.
And the irrigation water is free, costs nothing.
How much do you pay for 100,000 litres of water Dio?
I pay nothing [when I can get it from my lagoon that is] and I have a licence to take millions.
Most irrigation water evaporates before it gets to the crop and increases the salinity of the river which you and Mrs/Ms Dio and others are paying to get partly removed so you can drink second rate [at best] water.
These 3 irrigation areas which constitute a small percent of the total irrigation usage in SA, between them would use more water than any one, maybe two, of the Iron Triangle towns, Whyalla/Port Augusta/ Port Pirie and those towns have a far greater economic value.
The situation is crazy.
Crazy.
You’d never even heard his name a couple of weeks ago *giggle*
Definately a cleanskin tho… and looks respectable… as far as a Liberal goes anyway.
I think this poll is realistic within Adelaide. The rural areas may be better for the Libs but they will never win 11 seats to claim government if they can’t regain any seats in Adelaide. On these numbers they won’t.
It isn’t just the dodgy documents smear-backfire (funny tactical coincidence that eh?) that has MHS so low. I think his constant berating about a new stadium previously was a total waste of timwhen there were other more important issues to tackle. Having seen how much Beatty wasted on the Suncorp Stadium redevelopment in Brisbane we coudl ill afford to blow that sort of cash in SA.
Also the SA economy is doing all right too. The last month employment actually grew. Throw in moer jobs when the stimulus projects move to the construction phase and Adelaide’s economy now is probably the most robust its been in 20 years. I don’t like Rann but I think both Foley and Conlon do a good job in their ministries.
Frankly I blame Brumbie for the water more than anyone. The desal plant should have been started sooner but we didn’t have the cash without the Federal support. There is a real risk that we will run low on water before its finished if we get another dry year.
However our water restrictions are still not as severe as SEQs were before their drought lifted. For that I do blame the overly populist Mike Rann. He should be acting now to restrict water usage. Take a look at what SEQ’s “Level 6″ water restrictions were and people might begin to understand how serious the water problem could get.
+1 fredex; some of the rural allocations are insane.
Whoa-ho-ho!!!
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25703010-5006301,00.html
I see they’re still going with the 63-37 statewide thing though…:
bob
Rann sounds like he’s got some good gossip there. That “strategically timed polls” sounds very ugly.
I gather Pyne is in the Chapman corner. Dunno about Dolly and Minchin.
That’s the first thing I’ve heard Williams say and he’s done the right thing. Let’s hope he’s better than MHS, which wouldn’t be hard.
As if anyone would be stupid enough to be in the Chapman corner. What a disaster waiting to happen she is.
I can’t believe the number of people who are saying dolly should lead the party. I mean seriously, this is the guy who couldnt even lead the federal Libs for a year, with gaffe after gaffe after gaffe. The guy is a walking joke. It makes one wonder, with comments like that, that they actually enjoy being in opposition? Or are they so deluded that they actually believe it…?
To me, it actually sounded like Rann said those who created MHS will tear him down with strategically timed polls…
So it’s still quite feasible for MHS to remain leader up to the election.
And to think that the 2006 election was the best Labor was capable of doing… lol.
Two observations.
First. We get this:
Then we get this:
Interesting.
Second. MHS says this:
I seem to recall MHS attempting to challenge Kerin prior to the 2006 election. He went to challenge Kerin in October 2005, with the July-September Newspoll giving Labor 54%. The latest Newspoll, January-March, gives Labor 56% – and that’s before dodgygate. MHS seems a tad hypocritical if you ask me.
Not directly relevant, but down here in Hobart we’re up to our back-teeth in water.
And we blame Labor!
PS we had a day of sunlight today and Hobart looked like a Chinese Laundry…
Check it out! Mitch Williams is complying with the Adam Carr / Barry O’Farrell “Leader must not have beard” rule. Before:
http://www.saliberal.org.au/images/members/williams.jpg
After:
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200811/r317910_1411647.jpg
P.S: He was first elected in 1997, but I swear the first time I heard of him was a few weeks ago when he told M-H-S that he should resign.
SO
I hadn’t heard of him until then either. At least he’s a cleanskin.
If tears could fill the basin, I have wept. And wept. You may or not remember my sadness over the loss of water for SA. Mind you, it was a little petty, but significant, nevertheless.
No chance that the Libs in SA could be elected, next round.
Every chance that Mike Rann and co would be.
Not because they deserve it.
Anyone else wondering what the 5-letter R-word was? I can only come up with words meaning redhead and Russian, and can’t see where either would fit in.
DB
More clues, please.
Raped?
Funny thing about Mitch Williams… he was elected as an independent (against the Liberals) due to a stupid factional argument in the SA Libs. He joined the party again a bit later on, but jeez it’d be funny if he ended up leading it. I think Iain Evans did the same thing, too. What’s with the Liberals over there?
It was Iain Evans’s father that was elected as an Independent Liberal in 1985, defeating Dean Brown. Evans had been a Liberal MP, contested after losing pre-selection to Brown (their seats had been amalgamated in a redistribution) and later re-joined the party. Ian Evans later succeeded his father.
Bingo ShowsOn.
When you compare Rann’s government to the excuse of a government of Brown/Olsen/Kerin, Rann definately deserves it.
The Liberals couldn’t run themselves let alone the state. At least Rann can do both. Even if the latter isn’t all that spectacularly.
The Advertiser has gone very low key on this story this morning. You have to traverse to page 4 of the ’tiser to even find a mention of this story and it’s hidden under the main headline on page 4 which is about today’s Galaxy Poll release.
Reading between the lines we can take this as the Advertiser advocating that Martin Hamilton-Smith should keep his job. It could be that the Sunday Mail is in the anyone but MHS camp, and the ’tiser is backing the status quo. Perhaps we can look forward to the release of electorate level opinion polls in the Sunday Mail next weekend …
I don’t get why the Sunday Mail and Advertiser would have different opinions… I thought they were all part of the multi-headed Murdoch beast. Do they operate as different papers or something?
Yes and no.
But I spose yes, they do operate as different papers.
A classic example of Sunday Mail v The Advertiser was the Nicole Cornes issue. The Sunday Mail announced she would be an ALP candidate and trumpeted her credentials. The Advertiser on the other hand was very scathing of her.
The new RAH has also been a good example with the Advertiser moderately enthusiastic, and the Sunday Mail being neutral to negative on the issue.
Poodle adds his 2c!
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25705590-2682,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25705810-5006787,00.html
Bravo.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/29/2611320.htm
A bit of fizz, and then nothing. MHS to serve for the short-term.
Just for those wondering about Mitch Williams’ background and election as an independent, he was a long-time party member who quit the party to run against powerbroker Dale Baker in 1997. Dale had a lot of questions around his business dealings and was not popular in his electorate. Williams’ election was widely seen as enhancing the SA Libs’ reputation by clearing out Baker.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25705810-5006787,00.html
Is this code for MHS realising he needs to step down but can’t leave the SA Liberals without a leader, as no MP has the numbers so they need to spend time weaving enough support to get one through?
What a bloody shambles the SA Liberals are.
Interesting that News Ltd did not provide the full quote… it took the independent weekly:
http://www.independentweekly.com.au/news/local/news/general/sa-libs-should-hold-leadership-ballot-pyne/1553400.aspx
And the articles with their juicy tidbits keep rolling in…
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25705590-5006301,00.html
The fact that no one has, as yet, put their hand up publicly is surely an indication that none of the possible alternatives want the job at this stage. What we seem to be watching is the political equivalent of musical chairs. With the next election looking a foregone conclusion none of the aspirants wants to blot their copybook with the blemish of an election loss as leader.
Mitch Williams and Vickie Chapman at a minimum, want the job, but the party can’t decide who it wants – nobody is managing to get the numbers.
Bob,
So you believe everyone is desperate for the spoils of opposition and defeat?
They sense that Rann is on the nose (but not enough to be kicked out), theres only 9 months left till the election, it’s the perfect time for a cleanskin to come in. I believe Williams would certainly have a reasonable chance, though it is more likely than unlikely he would lose.
It’s also this – the Liberals would rather lose by less than the 2006 result. They don’t want to go backward.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,27574,25705590-2682,00.html
I wonder if those 4 votes is including or excluding M-H-S’s own vote?
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25705590-5006301,00.html
Antony, small typo in your excellent piece on the SA polling. Port AugustA. Cheers
lol, Pyne and Minchin going at it…
Link would be good…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25710628-5006787,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25705590-2682,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25711811-5013871,00.html
Bwahahahahaha… hilarious.
There’s nothing on the Tiser website. What’s going on?
They’re reusing the same article.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25705590-5006301,00.html
bob
I saw this at Rann’s Twitter site.
Was that Chapman? Looks like “rack em and stack em” will be the attack from Mr Tough on Crime.
I think we already know that Chapman as Liberal leader is a disaster waiting to happen. I don’t know what a worse outcome would be – MHS remaining leader, or Chapman taking over. I think the most sensible option, from their perspective, would be Mitch Williams.
Leadership spill called for Saturday:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25713106-5006301,00.html
Both Leader and Deputy Leader positions will be open. Hamilton-Smith is running again for leader.
The problem seems to be that the anyone but MHS forces can’t decide on a candidate, which threatens to split their vote, and thus allow MHS to stay on as leader.
The Liberals are truly a sad rabble. No loyalty whatsoever. Vickie Chapman looked pretty smug and confident last night on ABC news as she walked past the cameras. She could hardly keep the smile off her face – she’s going to win, I’m sure of it.
Mike Rann gets in some early attacks on Vickie Chapman:
That quote was from Rann’s Twitter account:
http://twitter.com/PremierMikeRann
lullery
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25713106-5006301,00.html
Really? I’d never have noticed…
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25714150-5006301,00.html
Advertiser editorial on “why MHS must remain leader”…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/30/2612676.htm
I reckon MHS will win the ballot now. Liberals are definately going to lose next year.
Oh, and in that link Isobel Redmond and Iain Evans also say they won’t challenge.
So it’s MHS vs Chapman. MHS has already won.
There’s 22 Liberals in the S.A. parliament right.
Wouldn’t it be hilarious if both candidates get 11 votes?
What if they had a leadership challenge and no one came?
And it would be made more hilarious by the fact that part of the anger toward MHS is the 2pp swing they suffered against Labor at the Frome by-election. Rob Kerin would definately have voted for MHS (conservative) over Chapman (moderate).
I’m surprised Chapman counts as a moderate. I thought she was party of the snooty Liberal establishment, e.g. like Alexander Downer.
ShowsOn
I’ve never seen Chapman string enough intelligible words together to form a sentence let alone a position on where she would fit on the spectrum. She’s possibly the worst politician I’ve ever seen in a leadership role.
If she is made leader of the Libs, I predict an armageddon at the next election. I haven’t met a single person with a good word to say about her.
To me she is a perfect example of the sort of Adelaide Liberal establishment figure who gets bored in middle age, so decides to get a seat in parliament.
“Neither” is currently the preferred Liberal leader according to an AdelaideNow poll:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/poll/display/0,22621,5040431-5006301-1,00.html
I dare say she always wanted to be in parliament – her father was a Liberal MP. Liberal families tend to be bred en masse here in SA.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25713106-5006301,00.html
Who should lead the SA Liberals?
Martin Hamilton-Smith
27% (289 votes)
Vickie Chapman
35% (377 votes)
Neither
37% (396 votes)
lollerskates
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25716165-2702,00.html
Now that we know the leadership challenge is between MHS and Vickie Chapman on Saturday, it will add weight to the saying “Damned if you do and damned if you don’t”.
Another free kick to the Labor Party.
bob
I think Neither would do a much better job than either Chapman or MHS, and give Rann a run for his money. I hope the Libs do the right thing. :cheese:
I think Mitch Williams was hoping MHS would stand down so he’d pick up the conservative votes. He knows that with MHS running he won’t get the numbers.
Why doesn’t he tell us how much profit The Australian makes?
Now it turns out MHS had an anonymous phone call telling him the Dodgy documents were fake before he released them. What a cretin.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25713106-5006301,00.html
10 News Adelaide just reported that Alexander Downer is the S.A. Liberals’ chief fund-raiser for the next election.
I think Labor will get 56% of the vote again.
Looks like the Young Liberals have been working overtime:
You have already voted! Here are the results so far:
Who should lead the SA Liberals?
Martin Hamilton-Smith
36% (1354 votes)
Vickie Chapman
39% (1457 votes)
Neither
24% (911 votes)
According to The Advertiser, MHS already has 13 votes, and thus will win easily:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25713106-5006301,00.html
That sucks, I really wanted to see how the Liberals would go without their major donor paying for half of their election campaign.
ShowsOn, my link @ 107 reckons 14 of 22… wonder who the 14th is…
But it’s hilarious that MHS will stay. The SA Liberals had already lost next years election after dodgygate and all the fallout afterward, but then MHS called a spill, and he won it against the dill known as Vickie Chapman. With only these two as contenders, they were stuffed either way.
But now the Liberals are left with the status quo. They have a leader that SA laughs at. Labor can’t lose, pending an absolute disaster.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25721858-5013948,00.html
I bet he is
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25727141-601,00.html
So today’s the day. Barring some bizarre event, MHS is to be re-elected to the party leadership, and next year re-elected to opposition, probably with the same landslide margin of 2006.
Quite funny.
Even funnier.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25730198-2682,00.html
Venning accuses Atkinson of creating the dodgy documents. Will they never learn?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25730602-2702,00.html
Partyroom vote at 10am.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
Hamilton-Smith holds on to the leadership.
Couldn’t have been any closer either. 11 votes to 10 with one abstaining.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
Instead of doing this he should’ve recognised that he effectively retained the leadership based on his own vote.He should’ve just resigned.
That Advertiser article says that Mitch Williams abstained, well that should rule him out of ever being leader, because he couldn’t make a hard choice.
At the top of this page I hoped that the result would be 11 votes all. but this result is even better, the idiot MHS has now requested that this speculation play out for another 5 days!
And he may just do that. Chapman says she’ll be recontesting the leadership, MHS says he hasn’t made up his mind yet. If MHS does step down, another one would be needed anyway.
I wonder what he’ll do.
I think Chapman would be a fantastic choice from a Labor perspective though. God she’s thick. She makes Mark Latham look great in comparison.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,24897,25731857-601,00.html
I think he is doing it out of stupidity.
Who is stupider?:
Martin Hamilton-Smith
Sarah Palin
Sarah Palin.
A better and harder question to answer would have been between Chapman and Palin. I think Chapman may very well be Australia’s equivalent of Palin.
I see The Advertiser is still applying a metro poll to all of SA…
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
This bit is interesting…
This would be funny…
The only reason he would say this is if he didn’t want the leadership.
If the vote is split 11 all between MHS and Chapman, then the only solution is to give the leadership to someone else.
How hilarious is Isobel Redmond! She was easily elected deputy leader, but then she wouldn’t rule out running for the position as leader next Wednesday!
Reminds me of Hawke being treasurer for a day hehe. Though in completely different circumstances.
LOL! I only just read the Sunday Mail. According to Christian Kerr, Mitch Williams, who last Sunday went to the back bench after saying MHS’s leadership was doomed, ultimately voted for MHS!
From the tone of the article Kerr came across as a Vickie Chapman supporter.
What?! I thought Williams would have been the MP who abstained, because he’s conservative to the bone so would never vote for Chapman, but would also never vote for MHS after the fallout between them. I wonder where Kerr got his supposed facts from. And if he’s right, and Williams voted MHS, then I wonder which MP was the one to abstain and why……….
Mmm, she certainly has a way with words. She’s always been as thick as Chapman (well, almost…).
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
o_O
Interesting comment left on The Advertiser:
Who’s stupider?: Martin Hamilton-Smith Vickie Chapman Sarah Palin
Posted by: ShowsOn of Adelaide 4:57pm July 04, 2009
Redmond officially nominates:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
Apparently it was Iain Evans.
According to Kerr?
Mitch Williams has now nominated according to 9 News!
I wonder if that means he has got inside word that MHS won’t be running?
Hmm, can’t find it online anywhere…
But if he does nominate, as the only conservative candidate to nominate so far, i’d say the Liberal leadership is his. Redmond and Chapman are both moderates.
The moderate votes may stick together though in a 2nd round of voting.
It is quite possible that MHS is current negotiating for a plum job, e.g. shadow treasurer in return for not running and supporting Williams.
ABC News confirm Williams and Redmond have nominated, along with Chapman who nominated yesterday.
They also said that Griffiths will be running again for deputy leader.
Monday 6th June… (even though it still isn’t, but who knows what they put in the water at the Tiser…)
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
Still no mention of Williams?
I speak too soon.
You left out the funny bit:
What I think they should do is ALL stand, and every week ONE person is voted out, until there are only 2 left, then home viewers get to choose. The winner can be announced on Stateline S.A.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25737091-16382,00.html
The media really really really need to stop treating the Sunday Mail 64/36 metro poll as if it were statewide.
Yeah, but isn’t it kind of funny that the Liberals are having a complete meltdown when the poll result was bad, but not any worse than at the last election?
They cared more about the impression the poll gave. Well timed by the Sunday Mail… it was just the last nail in the coffin, after Dodgy-gate, and the disaster that was the Frome by-election, where they went backward on the ALP v Lib 2pp, and lost the seat after preference distribution to an independent.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25737957-5006787,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25738101-601,00.html
It really is rich of MHS, considering how he got in to parliament in 1997, and how he unsuccessfully challenged Kerin for the leadership, then Evans. He can dish it out but he can’t take it.
HAHAHA, shit huh? That language doesn’t suit a leader of a major party!
The conservatives are furious!!
Redmond is my local member and whilst I do not in any way support her or her policies and put her second to last at the previous election, based on my dealing with her i’d have to say she seems like quite a nice lady (although i think i remember hearing something about her being involved in some dodgy litigation), far better than Downer (scum of the Earth) or his replacement (junior scum hack import bugger who in no way represents me in Canberra, which is why we need PR). I was also impressed with her efforts to prevent the banning of ‘hookers’ (not prostitutes but those pipes that catapillas and Arabs smoke. Are they spelled the same?). However I do not want to see her leader for two reasons 1: selfishly I don’t want the opposition leader as my local member because that will make it harder to remove her and 2: If I have reasonbly favourable opinion of her then it would follow that others would too and so she could do well for the Libs at the election.
Yes, Heysen is the best lower house seat for the Greens (as it was for the Democrats) and Redmond as Liberal leader would most likely help her. Though what i’m hoping for, and what may well come true, is that Redmond has almost the same level of intelligence that Chapman has. If Redmond does gain the Liberal leadership, I hope she stuffs up big time when the election campaign proper rolls around, and causes a bundle of votes to go to the Greens in protest, and win the seat.
To have the other side take a leader’s seat is one feat, but for a minor party to unseat a leader, now that’s something!
Oh come on William, how on earth in anything I said in reply have caused it to be locked in awaiting moderation? I honestly can’t see a single word in it that might have caused it. Sigh.
Come back later to read my reply Molotov.
The spam filter just catches innocent comments sometimes. Nothing to do with me.
Bob123
For that to work it would have to be a stuff up of MHS-ian proportions. One day it will be a Greens seat but i don’t think it will be at the 2010 election – either 2014 or 2018.
Bob, the funny thing is that Joh Bonkers- Petersen found himself in a very similar position years ago when he was considered weak and incoherent as Premier leading to a challenge to his leadership. He phoned people all night before the vote which was drawn but gave himself the casting vote and went on to be an extreme and incoherent Premier for years.
It isn’t over till the votes are counted and absolutely anything could happen with this amount of heat and pressure. Thanks for the updates so far, it has been like someone commentating at a circus, very entertaining all weekend with yet more to come.
Ahh, catapillers and Arabs suck on smoking hot HOOKAHS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hookah
This sounds like a typical hardcore Tory who is about to make a fool of his friends at News Ltd. It would be stranger than fiction for a leader to stand down two days after being elected leader. It sounds to me like someone who is going to try and tough it out against the odds as his fearless leader is trying to do at a national level.
News Radio reported about 20 minutes ago that Martin Hamilton Smith WILL run for the leadership.
However, ABC local radio Adelaide sayd that MHS still hadn’t decided, and would make an announcement later today.
ABC local radio Adelaide just said they believe Iain Evans will be running for leader too!
Christopher Pyne:
What a moron, he can’t even stick up for his political party!
(Former Labor Senator) Chris Schacht:
Martin Hamilton-Smith will be doing a press conference in 32 minutes.
Will he announce the Leadership Meeting is canceled or his resignation?
The Australian and NewsRadio think he will announce he is a candidate on Wednesday.
ABC Local Radio and The Advertiser think he will announce that he is resigning and won’t re-contest.
Why would he be a candidate when he has just been chosen leader? It makes no sense.
He’ll be on live here I hope.
http://www.abc.net.au/adelaide/radio/player.htm?winstream=http://abc.net.au/adelaide/onair/891stream.asx&ramstream=http://abc.net.au/adelaide/onair/891stream.ram
Because he wants to win the leadership with more votes.
I’m starting to think that he will announce his resignation in order to help Mitch Williams win.
The Australian are now reporting he is likely to stand down, even though he previously said such reports were “shit”:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25738101-601,00.html
MHS has JUST announced that he wont be standing as leader.
ShowsOn he might be trying to do a Troy Buswell. Become Shadow Treasurer or something.
Good point. Maybe he has decided to support Redmond as long as she makes him Shadow Treasurer.
Maybe that will be enough to give her more votes than Chapman.
Press conference on local radio now.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/sa-liberal-leader-stands-down-20090706-d9jj.html
I bet he won’t! When the only conservative faction MP running for the leadership was the earliest MP to say you should go, and then resign from your cabinet, you’re not left with much choice are you!
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Though I will miss seeing what other seats would have fallen to Labor under MHS.
Well, I interpreted his lack of endorsement as a confirmation that he is currently battling behind the scenes for a plum job, e.g. shadow treasury.
It is quite possible that whoever he votes for will win the contest, because he would have a few factional friends who will be willing support whoever he supports.
Well he definately won’t support Chapman or Williams, and the fact that those who voted for MHS are giving their vote to Redmond is rather telling.
Williams ultimately voted for MHS remember, I guess because it made it harder for Chapman to win.
I think MHS would vote for Williams if it increased the chance of Chapman losing.
I think it would be funny if each candidate (Chapman, Redmond, Williams) gets 7 votes and there is one abstention.
What do they do then? Play again on Saturday?
Why not Redmond? That’s where the MHS votes are going to apparently.
Because Redmond effectively challenged him on the day she became deputy leader?
I still think we need some Game Theory experts to explain all the permutations.
Fumiest news story background image ever!
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/3788/liberalcrack2.jpg
Nice!
Adelaide A Current Affair promo:
Exactly.
Crikey’s take.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/07/06/news-flash-another-lib-leader-bites-the-dust/
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6704435,00.jpg
That’s got to be the best photo i’ve ever seen of Isobel Redmond. I’m sure now that MHS has gone, the ‘Tiser will fully swing behind the Liberals again.
The Tiser didn’t support Iain Evans.
Why would they? He was hopeless right from the beginning, and before that.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-2682,00.html
Fantastic! Both of these comments suggest that a 7 – 7 – 7 split with one abstention is a possibility!
Then they can have another leadership spill on Saturday!
Even an 8-7-6 split would crush the party. A three-way leadership contest, with such a small caucus, is never a good idea.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25742263-5006787,00.html
Another fairly decent wrap-up.
What happens if there is a 8 – 7 – 7 split?
How do they decide which candidate is eliminated? Do they have a special ballot just to work out which candidate is excluded from the last ballot?
Mitch Williams is an utter joke candidate. He may well end up delivering the leadership to Vickie Chapman if he’s not careful. Isobel Redman would have to be their best bet. She seems a fairly no nonsense sort of character in the limited media coverage I’ve seen of her. She would certainly be a more measured opoosition leader than MHS ever was. Decimated oppositions need safe steady leadership when they have a mountain to climb.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/07/2618858.htm
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25743714-2702,00.html
Ahh so there’ll be two votes to redistribute the votes of the candidate who comes last.
Well based on that article, I think Redmond will be leader come tomorrow.
Crikey’s take:
The Chapman faction IS what remains of The Liberal Movement! Except now it is inside the tent.
LOL! Isobel Redmond, the favourite to win the leadership of the S.A. Liberals tomorrow, was previously a member of the Labor party!
Source?
10 News
Seems spell-check isn’t working at the ‘Tiser today…
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25746118-2682,00.html
Will Isobel Redmond get rid of all the fundamentalist Christians who have infiltrated the South Australian Liberal Party????? Time will tell!!!!!
On http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/news/state/ ….
The article is yet to be updated though.
Here it is:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
Woah, I can’t believe Chapman is favourite.
Now that Hamilton-Smith has gone, I wonder if Robert Gerard will stick to his threat of ending donations?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25716165-2702,00.html
Apparently Gerard’s contributions to the Liberals at the during the last state election was 50% of their total donations.
I wonder if Chapman supporters have just fed this story to the media to try to encourage others to support Chapman to make the result conclusive?
The worst result of all would be if after Wiliams is excluded, Chapman and Redmond both get 11 votes. but the second worse result would be 12 to 10 either way.
I hope Chapman gets in. I want to see more Liberal seats fall to Labor
Well considering the following:
Comes from “one of MHS’s strongest supporters”, and the last bit comes from Redmond supporters, I don’t reckon it’s a ploy by Chapman supporters… but who knows.
This person could just be pretending to be a MHS supporter. I mean how exactly would the journalist know how the person voted in a secret ballot?
I’ve gotta say, I’ve got no clue why they’re so keen to go for Chapman as leader. She’s got less charisma than any other leader I’ve ever seen except Eric Ripper. If they’re stupid enough to go with her, it’ll be a very entertaining election night – and hopefully we’ll be saying buh-bye to folks like Pisoni.
I suspect Williams-Redmond ticket would be far more successful, and would in all probability take a few seats off Liberals, but the state Liberals seem to be rather short of strategic sense. So I shall be looking forward to election night 2010 then…
In the Australian
and here in comments ShowsOn says:
I didn’t realize Pyne was a moderate but okay – if that is the case and Chapmen represents the small ‘l’ within the party then why does Pyne have bitterness towards her?
Is Chapmen really the moderate I have to barrack for? She is painful! Actually I suppose its a good thing if she’s elected – her being ‘moderate’ (sic) might move the middleground that the parties argue over slightly to the Left which may mean slightly less Rightwing ALP government policies plus the fact that personality wise she is not so charming and so not a vote winner makes her the perfect candidate. On the otherhand I think I couldn’t really stand seeing her face in the media all the time so perhaps my local MP Redmond will have to do. Otherwise I don’t really care – they are all conservative dinosaurs of an obsolete age anyway.
Pyne and Chapman are moderates and Pyne supports Chapman. You’re reading it wrong.
This is saying that the MHS camp has a lot of bitterness to Chapman and her supporters which include Pyne.
Ah
Thanks Bob1234
Isobel Redmond wins 13 to 9.
Bah! I wanted that hapless Chapman to win!
Her deputy will be finance spokesman Steve Griffiths, who beat Mitch Williams 8 votes to 6.
I hope Redmond blows up and Heysen falls to the Greens
http://www.saliberal.org.au/index.php/house-of-assembly/79-isobel-redmond-mp
Gee they’re quick!!
http://www.saliberal.org.au/index.php
And on the right!
http://martin2010.com.au/
Hahahaha
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25749782-5013945,00.html
Expect Labor to talk about this a lot.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25749782-5013945,00.html
Seems Redmond was the worst choice of the lot!
http://www.independentweekly.com.au/news/local/news/general/isobel-redmond-new-liberal-leader/1562383.aspx
I wonder if it’ll be broadcast anywhere…
Probably on 891 AM.
Bah, all the TV News is dominated by Jackson. The SA Liberals are more important!
Not as yet…
891 AM – Redmond conference at midday.
http://twitter.com/PremierMikeRann/statuses/2524421435
Mmhm. Rann wants the Libs as much as I do to continue their infighting. He might say it but honestly, who’d believe it…?
Well none of the TV stations or 891 have broadcast the Redmond conference…
891 ABC broadcasting it now.
It was only a brief clip.
Sigh, looks like we’ll have to put up with her in my neck of the woods for at least 4 and a bit more years.
As I said, she’s smarter than Chapman but only just. I think there’s a reasonable chance she’ll stuff up big time prior to election day, potentially driving voters to the Greens in Heysen, the electorate that polled highest for the Greens at the last election. The Green vote has doubled in Newspoll since the last election, so I think the Greens will easily poll in the 20s/30s, maybe higher if she stuffs up.
http://www.borderwatch.com.au/archives/3308
Gotta love vexnews…
http://www.vexnews.com/news/5229/fresh-start-sa-libs-to-rise-from-the-ashes-with-redmond/
891 doing an extended broadcast of the interview.
SNIP: Stupid comment deleted – The Management.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25750660-5006301,00.html
God she’s ugly.
http://www.pollbludger.com/sa2006/heysen.htm
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/comments/0,22638,25750660-5006301,00.html
According to one of the comments, Chapman made a freudian slip on ABC news tonight – she “pledged her uncommitted-opps unconditional support to the new leader”
Y’know what’s a shame?
We’ll never know what Newspoll under Dodgygate MHS would have looked like.
Careful there. The Greens vote statewide may double, but the vote in their best seat will probably increase by a smaller proportion than that. Similar idea: some marginal ALP/Lib seats swung by 10%+ to Labor in the last federal election, but not the safe Labor ones – less room for improvement. With SA Labor being inevitably less popular than in 2006, I can see the Greens finishing second, but I’d be surprised if they got over 25%.
(Of course, I probably said the same thing about Fremantle at last year’s state election, and was quite happily proven wrong. Does the Molotov have any inside info on Heysen?)
According to one of the comments, Chapman made a freudian slip on ABC news tonight – she “pledged her uncommitted-opps unconditional support to the new leader”
Oh, that’s gold. True, though. I’d suggest the odds of Redmond losing the election and being forced out while Chapman and Williams spar over her political corpse…rather better than $6.25.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25754271-7583,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25754272-5006787,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25754268-12339,00.html
Mmm, not hard to tell who News Ltd is barracking for…
Yes. … Full Stop. I don’t really know what would be wise to make public though so I won’t say anything. I don’t think the Greens can win in 2010 – 2014 maybe.
Something I am willing to discuss but which is of very little significants: many years ago when my 1/2 American mate took us ‘trick or treating’ we went to Redmonds door and she’d bothered to dress up the place with spooky stuff and her daughter gave us loads of good loot. I also played a boardgame with one of her sons once: ‘Monopoly’ of course! – bloody torys.
LOL
If Isobel does stuff up or the public still think the Libs are a joke, I dare say the Greens have a better chance in 2010, than in 2014 where the Libs will have more choices to pick from for leader. 2010 is a perfect storm for the Greens where the public aren’t happy with either party. Albiet more the Libs than Labor.
I must say though, a 51% approval and 34% disapproval rating for Rann is pretty damn good considering he’s been leader since 1994 and Premier since 2002.
Can anyone tell me the last time, state or federal, that there had been the same Labor leader for 15+ years?
Bob Carr, 1988-2005
Oh wow, that late.
Thanks
Though in SA, if one considers all party leaders, I believe Rann is the longest in history, Playford aside.
251
It is true that marginals do often swing more than safe seats but it is quite possible that swings to the Greens are stronger in safe seats.
I wonder if Possum has done a graph comparing individual seat swings at the 2007 federal election…
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25758518-5006301,00.html
I wonder if someone can tell me how they think the boundary redistribution will affect the Green vote in Heysen based on 2006 booths?
It falls from 17.7% to 16.6%
Thanks Antony
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25763346-2682,00.html
What a pompous wanker!
268
Downer included a high proportion of academics and university graduates as one of the reasons that the Liberal do so well. Are they all high end academics and university graduates mainly from non Art/social faculties and professions? Or has Downer forgotten the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s and 2000s not to mention the Howard Governments higher education policies and the reasons behind them?
Julia Bishop also grew up in the Adelaide hills.
Everything he ever says burns me up. He was the worst.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25770690-5006787,00.html