The latest Reuters Poll Trend weighted average of Newspoll, Morgan and ACNielsen results has federal Labor with a two-party lead of 55.8-44.2, presumably being weighed down a little by recent results from before the weekend.
UPDATE: Roy Morgan has joined in on the action with a small sample (546) phone poll including questions on leadership approval, which Morgan doesn’t normally do. It finds Malcolm Turnbull’s approval rating down to 25 per cent from 43 per cent in May, with his disapproval up a breathtaking 33.5 per cent to 62.5 per cent. Kevin Rudd’s approval rating on 63 per cent, up from 57.5 per cent in May, with his disapproval rating down from 33.5 per cent to 29 per cent. Labor holds leads of 56-44 on two-party preferred and 46 per cent to 39 per cent on the primary vote, which is actually quite mild by Morgan standards. Newspoll has also published its quarterly geographic and demographic breakdowns of recent polling by state, age, sex, and capitals/non-capitals.
Apart from that:
• Robert Taylor of The West Australian reports that Labor preselections for some highly winnable Liberal-held seats in Perth appear to be ”stitched up”. In the only two seats in the country which the Coalition gained from Labor in 2007, Cowan and Swan, those respectively named are Wanneroo mayor Jon Kelly and Slater & Gordon lawyer Tim Hammond. Kelly is interesting, as he ran as an independent against state Labor MP Margaret Quirk in Girrawheen at the 2005 election after a split in the Right faction. In Stirling, where decorated Iraq war veteran Peter Tinley failed to unseat current Shadow Workplace Relations Minister Michael Keenan in 2007, the nod is apparently set to be given to Karen Brown, former deputy editor of The West Australian and current chief-of-staff to Eric Ripper. Brown famously failed to win the new notionally Labor seat of Mount Lawley at the state election last September after suffering an 8 per cent swing, which many blamed on Alan Carpenter’s insistence that local member Bob Kucera make way for Brown. Peter Tinley is said to be holding out for a safe seat or a Senate position, and the unlikelihood of either suggests he will not be a starter at the next election. In Hasluck, which Sharryn Jackson recovered for Labor in 2007 after a term in the wilderness, Liberals are said by Taylor to be “working behind the scenes” to secure the endorsement of Mike Dean, who last week stepped down from his high-profile position as president of the Police Union.
• The ABC reports that Kathryn Hay will seek Labor preselection for Bass at next year’s state election. Hay is a former Miss Tasmania who became Tasmania’s first Aboriginal MP when elected at the age of 27 in 2002. After surprising everybody by dropping out at the 2006 election, Hay ran as an independent against Ivan Dean in the upper house seat of Windermere in May, and did very well to finish within 5 per cent of victory on the final count. With incumbent Jim Cox retiring, Michelle O’Byrne a sure bet for re-election, and Labor looking certain to win a second seat but very unlikely to pick up a third, the battle for the second seat is looking like a tussle between Hay, Beaconsfield mine disaster survivor Brant Webb, CFMEU forests division secretary Scott McLean (who famously came out in support of John Howard at the 2004 federal election) and Winnaleah school principal Brian Wightman, with only the latter looking an obvious also-ran.
• Rick Wallace of The Australian reports that George Seitz, western Melbourne Labor Right potentate and state Keilor MP, proposes to publish a “warts and all” account of his career in politics. Seitz is being forced out after nearly three decades in parliament due to a Victorian Ombudsman’s report which probed into the involvement of various state MPs in goings-on at Brimbank City Council. The aforementioned Wallace article is worth reading for a broader overview of the episode’s far-reaching impact on the Victorian ALP.
• Andrew Landeryou at VexNews reports that the closure of nominations has brought no challenges to sitting federal Liberal MPs in Victoria – including Kevin Andrews in Menzies, who was believed to be under threat from former Peter Reith staffer Ian Hanke.
• Nick in comments informs us that according to a Channel Nine news report, Labor polling has it trailing the Coalition 57-43 on NSW state voting intention.
2,238 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 45 » Show All
Gary
You’ve said it yourself -
“Where possible” – and it isn’t possible if the majority view is not for the public good overall. For example, taxation, or climate change.
When I vote for a representative I want them to make intelligent decisions based on the best information – in the case of climate change, the best science and economic models arising from the scientific necessity.
I do not want them to make decisions based on a majority view opposing change, or against higher electricity charges. That would not be to the common good. For their own survival interests, they should explain, explain, and explain like mad, to change the majority view if necessary.
That’s ok if you have bi partisan support but when you don’t and there is an opportunistic opposition and a MSM just waiting for such a time to arise to kick shite out of you then that option becomes very problematical. That’s reality in the raw.
scorpio
I think you got the wrong end of my stick. Definitional problem. I’m talking about voters not wanting higher prices for electricity or a forced change of occupation, such as will be required for the CPRS.
We always like the sort of change that suits our aspirations and enhances our lifestyle.
OI guess the government’s job is to convince voters that their longer term aspirations are best served by the changes necessary to accommodate the scheme.
Err, most people support taxation. They recognise the need. It’s the degree of taxation that is the sticking point. Same with climate change.
The Government can garner 85% voter support for its ETS Bill and it will be absolutely “NO” benefit to it or the passage of the existing Bill or as the Greens want, an improved, strengthened Bill if the Coalition and the Independents vote against it in the Senate. If the Greens join the Coalition block it is even worse and even if thye Greens vote with the Government, the Bill still “won’t” pass.
Voters can jump up and, scream, and protest in droves in the streets and it will not make one scrap of difference to the outcome.
Politics is about the possible. The Government is trying to do what is possible, under extreme opposition from the Coalition, Greens and Independents.
You need to come up with a workable solution, not expecting, that wishful thinking or an active, concerned electorate can change the reality! Even the fact that Labor won the last election is not enough to get that Bill through.
It may not even be enough if they win the next one, but it will be “totally” impossible if the Coalition were to win the next election!
That’s milksop politics.
There even comes a time every once in a while on a big issue that arises quickly when a government should go out on a limb hoping it can convince the public and the opposition that what it is doing is right before the next election.
It’s a balancing act, but the emphasis on the big issues must be what is the best path in the interests of society overall – not what is the best path back to office and the white cars. Your view suits the latter approach morethan the former. And please don’t say “You’ve first got to be in power to make a difference.” If you are going to make decisions based on the path of least resistance then you won’t make a difference anyway. Better to risk going down in flaming glory on issues that are worth it.
And Law and Order issues is a Prime example. WA Labor is opposed to Mandatory Dentention for people who assault Police Officers, but in order to avoid the predictable “Soft on Crime” tag, had no choice but to allow it to pass the lower House. However in the Upper House Labor is seeking to amend the legislation to exempt Juveniles, which also requires the support of the Greens and 3 out of the 4 Nationals, who I bel;ieve have concerns as well.
Yes, but ask them if they want to pay less tax, or pay more for electricity. A couple of great openings for a populist politician there
You mean like Jo Valentine ?
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=152873
I agree, that is why I support abolishing the Senate.
Yeah, we saw how well that worked out for Howard with workchoices. Over $200m spent and a lot of political capital and what happened?
His Government was soundly defeated and he lost his own seat into the bargain.
We, I repeat, we are not in an election campaign with a political party pushing hard to convince the electorate that the country needs an ETS.
Instead, we have a Government, half way through its first term, having introduced an ETS Bill into the Parliament, having it passed and now trying valiantly to get it through the Senate but being obstructed by all other parties.
The Government can bellow out till their blue in the face and this Bill won’t pass through the Senate unless the Coalition back down and support it.
The voters have already spoken. It is the Coalition, the Greens and the Independents that have not listened.
Frank
The law and order auction that just goes on and on is a prime exampe of the failure of leadership of the two big poll-driven parties. It was time to say “Enough!” years ago on the mandatory matrixes of meaningless statospheric sentences. The politicians have access to the best advice on what works with offenders, which is emphatically not ‘lock ‘em up and throw away the key’, but in full knowledge of this they adopt a ‘Steve Fielding’ position -wilfull ignorance – to pander to the ill-informed fearful elements in society who don’t realise that such policies make them much less safe.
It’s a collective failure of ethical standards by the big parties’ members across Australia that makes the UK pollies abuse of allowances look reasonable.
JV @341
Exactly! I and my other half have been life long labor voters but have become progressively more disenchanted with the 2 main political parties.
In the circles that we move in there are a growing number of people who are interested in Greens Party policies and would like to support them. However when it comes down to the crunch at election time they put the Greens second because of a lack of understanding about the voting system.
Take my word for it when I say that we and our friends do not fit the stereotype which is perpetuated ad nauseum here and in the MSM. J
It must follow logically from that that there are also many people who want more *right* wing policies.
And uh, what exactly happened to the idea of Labor as a party that stood for anything besides populism?
Oops. The ‘J’ was supposed to be a smiley face
JV, they did that before the last election. The ball is in the court of the Senate now, not the court of public opinion.
I have kept well and truly out of this argument (which has raged for an endless number of posts) up till now.
I think it is high time some people here critical of the Governments ETS and its inability to get it through the Senate, to take a good look at themselves and get a grip on reality. This is the “real” world we are dealing with here, not some fantasy land where all wishes come true.
This is one major reason why I support the Greens. If Labor is committed to acting entirely out of electoral self-interest, then we need to make it in their self-interest to enact progressive policies once in a while. I have no strong objection to seeing Green MPs tip a Labor government out of office to make this point.
And the last time Federal Labor did this they were relegated to Opposition for 13 years.
Sometimes I wonder if the Greens and their supporters are Closet Liberals.
Scorpio
Bad example – Workchoices failed the ‘for the common good’ test. Can’t sell that.
You can however sell policies that resonate with the voter like, say, avoiding the inundation of large parts of current population centres, or famine. If the government gets out after Copenghagen with the sort of effort put into the HIV campaign and Workchoices people will go with slightly higher energy prioces because by then there will be bi-partisan support, and the likes of Fielding will be in an irrelevant icon of idiocy. (Or more so)
Thereby installing a Coalition government by default? That’s taking cutting off one’s nose to spite their face to a new low.
Can any Green leaning polly bludger tell me what Labor policies they disagree with, apart from the CPRS?
Just askin’.
The Greens have less hope of winning a HoR seat than the Democrats. Get real 7.79% is not going to tip any Govt. out of office.
Labor have already convinced the electorate. They voted them into office. The Opposition had a similar policy leading into the election and now they are prepared to vote against it! Labor already has gone out on a limb by watering down their Bill to make it more acceptable to the Libs and they still won’t support it.
What more can they do? If they move even more away from the current position, then the Greens, who don’t support the current Bill, will be even less likely to support it.
That can only happen at the “next” election and I don’t think the nearly 4m people who voted for Labor at the last election would be very happy to see that, given all the problems facing us at the moment and which are being dealt with fairly well by the present Government.
There will be “NO” ETS if Labor crash and burn because the Coalition “will not” introduce one and even if they did, it would be so week as to be non-existent.
Ruawake @ 371
Offshore processing of refugees, the retention of the ABCC in another form, level of funding to private schools
scorpio
Just spent 5 minutes in the room of mirrors having good look at myself and emerge unreconstructed ?
I don’t really disagree with you about the current situation in the Senate anyway. Despite the shortcomings of the proposed scheme, it’s the best we’re going to get before Copenhagen, and I support its passage even if not strengthened. I do believe however, that the opposition will be forced to support it (or most of the rabble anyway – some will cross the floor).
World support for strong-ish targets at Copenhagen is growing too strongly for them to resist in the end. There is too much risk of them becoming pariahs now; the mood is shifting. So better to confront the divisions within the party now. I look forward to the August parliamentary session and the Senate vote. Should be the first big deal opportunity to watch live while we blog since ute-gate, I would say. The LNP will display more contortions than a circus.
THe Greens think the World is like Disneyland and they must keep singing this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yy-IcfOafI
That’s the last word from me on this subject and I will not be bothering to read any further posts on it because the debate is at such a low level as to belittle the intelligence of anyone who continues to push stupid lines and people like myself who respond, totally unsuccessfully to them!
Over and out!
sorry you’re disappointed scorpio. Will try to do better
And that’s Alice in Wonderland thinking. Commit political hari kari for the good of the cause and let those who totally opposed to your cause get in power and destroy everything you believe in. Good plan that.
Time to get back to reality.
It was 5,388,184 just for the sake of accuracy.
Does anyone know anything about Google Earth? Suddenly the maps are covered with hotel and restaurant symbols which won’t turn off.
Exactly and Turnbull is all that and more.
Gary – The aim isn’t to commit political suicide. It is to provide the sort of leadership that takes the people with you on the big decisions of common benefit. It shouldn’t be too much to ask. If they do that, then there is no loss of office.
Convincing enough voters should be achievable on the CPRS for example. I know a mojority support it in principle but the difficulty is with direct impacts on individuals.
Copenhagen should provide a good springboard (not borg) for some large scale education and advertising to convince people it’s worth some jobs changing and enegy prices getting a little higher. It is a pretty easy advertising job really. Just precis “The Day After Tomorrow” in 60 seconds. Give out fridge-magnet speaking dolls of Al Gore. That kind of thing
The Greens doln’t believe in Reality one iota, and they criticised me for using the term Political Har Kari as well – they must be a very maschoistic lot to continue to promise the iunachievable just because it makes you feel good inside, when the reality is that the AVERAGE Voter would punish you 100 fold if you even tried to implement them.
It seems they haven’t learnt from Meg Lees and the Democrats one little bit.
382 “mojority” = most people still in possession of their mojo.
Meanwhile in EVERY marginal electorate with a Carbon based industry the Opposition, bankrolled by Industry will be advertising the EXACT opposite emphasising Job Losses, closure of Towns etc, resulting in a victory to the LIbs/Nats.
Which would you rather prefer ?
#367 – Obviously you dont really know your enemy.
The Greens will never be the Govt, so you will never be able to enact any of your progressive policies on your own right. The only chance you got to enact your progressive policies is to work with either of the major parties, Labor or Liberals/National.
you should study Sun Tzu, so you know who your enemy is.
Y’know, when I see these eye-glazing Greens v. Lefties arguments, going on for sometimes hundreds of posts – with all the usual suspects participating, name calling and shouting at each other – I really do despair.
Greens: Labor won. Work with them.
Labor: You need the Greens’ votes in the Senate. Be nice to them.
Anybody else: The Revolution died 20 years ago. Get over it.
Adam
Under “Layers” do you have places of interest selected?
The continuation of the human race.
I think the day is coming Frank when you might have to step out of the virtual tally room and read a science journal or two.
BB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36xBQI0K-Kc
How would EU & USA react if the Iranians invade the British Embassy and take the diplomats as hostages as in 1979.
And no Science Journel will save you from the MOTHER of all Scare Campaigns resulting in the election of a Conservative Government who will implent NO ETS of ANY Description.
In response to ruawake at #371
Industrial Relations eg workNOchoices.
Unionism.
Water management with particular reference to the Murray.
Gay and Lesbian rights ie gay mariage,
Women’s issues eg single mothers and welfare, domestic violence, child sexual abuse, family law reform [but please note I do not confine just thes issues as being relevant to women].
Public education.
Public hospitals.
Unsustainable primary production.
Solinization of soils, soil erosion declining agricultural efficiencies.
The environment in general.
Indigenous affairs in general, the NT invasion in particular.
Regressive taxation.
Public versus private transport.
I think the ALP is doing little or less than they could or should in each of the categories above. Could. Should.
The little that they do is better than the nothing, or worse, that the COALition did and still has as spoken or tacit policy.
The Greens have better policy in each of the above categories, although stronger in some and weaker in others eg women’s issues.
In some areas the ALP has done very well.
Eg response to the GFC, infrastructure building in particular, some flaws but quite a brilliant strategy overall, National Broadband Network proposals and probably a couple I can’t think of off the top of my head.
As an active Labor supporter all my adult life I reserve the right to praise when appropriate and criticise when appropriate, to encourage what I see as good and to speak out against that which is not good or could be better notwithstanding the old and tired excuse of how difficult it is to do better. The search for a justification to fail.
I have an understanding, whether you agree or not, of the need for pragmatism and short/long term goals. I will complain when I think the ALP is short sheeting its supporters and using ‘pragmatism’ etc as an excuse for a failure of principle and political leadership.
I do not wish to be a ‘my party right or wrong’ non critical supporter but one who is prepared to stand up for policy that is right and just and not kowtow to factionalism in any of its forms.
Political leadership is a very difficult balancing act because one is in danger of being voted out if, in pursuit of what you think is right, you go too far ahead of the majority of the people. It is a matter of very difficult judgement as to how much political capital you should burn on which issues. I think Kevin has been a bit cautious in general, as have most of the State Labor governments, but their cautious reform is generally better than conservative reform in the other direction. But sometimes State labor have been so cautious for fear of frightening the horses, that although they manage to eke out 10 years or so in power, they end up with almost no reform. NSW would be an example here. It would have been better to be bolder and undertake some reforms that stuck even if it meant a few less years in power.
RU, no I have everything turned off. I think Google have been bribed by the hotel industry to make these symbols permanent.
387
Labor won on Green preferences.
Labor got 750,746 Green preferences in TCP.
http://results.aec.gov.au/13745/Website/HouseStateTcpFlow-13745-NAT.htm
Labor got only 43.38% of the primary vote.
Pegasus
Tell them it can be fixed that with PR, and not just for the Greens but all smaller parties – perhaps refer them fairvote.org as a starting point and tell them to spread the PR word.
Fredex
Well said, indeed.
Fredex
Thanks for at least trying.
These are policy areas, not policies. I would note that in many if not most, substantial progress has been achieved in the past 18 months.
Pages: « 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 45 » Show All