Galaxy: 56-44 to Coalition
GhostWhoVotes reports that a Galaxy poll, conducted from a sample of 995 from Friday to Sunday, has the Coalition leading 56-44 on two-party preferred, from primary votes of 31% for Labor, 49% for the Coalition and 12% for the Greens. Supplementary questions find 64% believing the government is worse off now than it was under Kevin Rudd, against 20% who think it better off; 59% believing the Prime Minister has failed to deliver an effective policy to reduce carbon emissions, against 59% who believe she has; and 57% saying she has failed in sharing the benefits of the mining boom, against 29% who say she has succeeded. There is also a frankly silly question as to whether the government has succeeded in stopping asylum seeker boats, to which 9% (presumably Labor partisans irritated by the question) wrongly said yes, and 80% offered the obvious response.
UPDATE: Essential Research records two-party preferred steady at 56-44, from primary votes of 33% for Labor (up one), 49% for the Coalition (steady) and 10% for the Greens (steady). Other questions cover most trusted party to handle various issues (Greens environment and climate change, Labor industrial relations, Liberal everything else); whether the economy is heading in the right or wrong direction (43-32 in favour, compared with 36-41 against in March); trust in people and organisations (Kevin Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull do better than Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott, who do better than Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart; and bias in media reporting in favour or against various groups (Liberals and business seen to do better than Labor and unions).
In other news, some state, territory and local government matters of note:
• Roy Morgan has published three phone polls of state voting intention for New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland on Friday, from a small combined sample of 811. While the margins of error are about 5.5%, the results are roughly in line with other polling in showing little change on the most recent elections, with the conservative incumbents leading 52-48 in Victoria and 62-38 in both New South Wales and Queensland. Personal ratings show a strikingly poor result for Ted Baillieu, at 29% approval and 53.5% disapproval. The polls were conducted on the Tuesdays and Wednesdays of the previous two weeks.
• I have lazily neglected to cover the publication of draft boundaries for the state redistribution in South Australia, but as always Antony Green has been well and truly on the job. The proposals have been uncommonly controversial in that they have essentially ignored the legislative injunction that the commissioners must, “as far as practicable”, draw boundaries which on the basis of the previous election results would have achieved “fairness” with respect to the major parties’ shares of seats and two-party preferred votes. Given Labor’s success in winning 26 out of 47 seats at the 2010 election from 48.4% of the two-party vote, this would have demanded tremendous creativity on the part of the redistribution commissioners, and presumably some very contorted electoral boundaries designed to slash Labor members’ margins.
• Refugee advocate Linda Scott has won the “community preselection” to determine Labor’s candidate to take on Clover Moore in the Sydney lord mayoral election in September. Half of the vote was determined by a ballot open to any of the 90,000 voters in the municipality (albeit that they were required to pledge that they were not members of a rival party), with the other half determined by party members. It attracted 400 party members and 3900 non-members. Labor will now trial the procedure in five yet-to-be-decided seats for the next 2015 state election. However, Andrew Crook of Crikey has reported the party’s various state branches are backing away from the idea of conducting primaries for the federal election, which they had been encouraged to pursue by the December national conference and the Bracks-Carr-Faulkner post-election review.
• Antony Green has published his guide to the Northern Territory election on August 25.
Federal preselection news:
Page 1 of 3 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
It could also be argued that those who thing Assange is best treated to a cell for the rest of his life have a healthy respect for democracy and democratic traditions, and an intolerance to those who threaten democracy ….
Just throwing that out there …
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:27 pm
Pegasus @ 4647
You have some good points there. A lot of it goes on here from people who cannot tolerate any disagreement.
by bemused on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:28 pm
I could say the same for “the cult of Julia” which operates here.
Pity the poor world leaders who’ve been bored to death by her pep talks & lectures on economic management(which by the way, she deserves no credit for).
by Thornleigh Labor Man on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:29 pm
Just when you thought things couldn’t possibly get any more absurd, Pegasus chimes in with a little do-it-yourself psychoanalysis.
by Jake on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:29 pm
Pegasus
OMFG on the same night I am +1 with both Thomas Paine and a Pegasus “Horsey”
by poroti on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:30 pm
zoom
Condom usage!
Apart from your aspersions regarding what I may or may not want from a one-night-stand, we’re not talking teenage sex here. we’re talking mature women in their late 20s, who consented to have sex with him FFS.
And, then, when the first one found out about the second one, they decided to call it rape.
It’s either rape or it’s not.
Not when you decide it a couple of weeks later, when you’re jealous. OKAY?
And the first prosecutor threw it out. Because it was crap. There was no evidence.
Would I want to get extradited to Sweden over that?
No.
Would I want to get extradited to Sweden on the off-chance I’d get sent to the USA to face espionage charges. No F way.
by kezza2 on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:30 pm
WeWantPaul @ 4651
As a joke?
by bemused on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:30 pm
Do you live in an alternative reality, or do you read News Ltd News and belong in the group with such little comprehensive ability they believe what they are told ..
there is a Leonard Cohen song written for poor buggers like you …
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:31 pm
Poroti, please painful pavlovian doggy aint got nothing like Horsey
by The Finnigans on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:32 pm
SHOCK HORROR, I will agree with Confessions on one thing: I too am over Julian Assange. He’s an attention seeker, and a cry baby. The Australian Government is giving this fruitcake enough consular assistance.
Running off to the Equatorian embassy is just a puerile stunt.
He ought to go to Sweden, and face the music.
by Thornleigh Labor Man on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:32 pm
Is there any guarantee that Assange will be nabbed by the Yanks ?
by Mick Collins on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:32 pm
WWP
by Pegasus on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:33 pm
WeWantPaul
How in heavens name can you argue that democratic lovers want someone to be :”best treated to a cell for the rest of his life” for divulging minor diplomatic messages to the
e public?
what fascist rock do you live under?
by swamprat on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:33 pm
Old fart, thank you for the complement, we do flip flip and flip all day & all night long
by The Finnigans on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:33 pm
Horsey, it’s never your fault as long as you cut & paste me up
by The Finnigans on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:34 pm
Thornleigh Labor Man
I am sure the Germans were riveted by Kevin Rudd’s “Detailed Programmatic Specificity”
by poroti on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:34 pm
I see none of the lynch mob have any answers to the commonsense question.
Why not do the cheap effective option of interview in a London Police Station in person or by videolink. Then if enough evidence exists to proceed with charges then go for the Extradition Warrant.
by guytaur on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:34 pm
It can be argued that:
1. Assange was right to release the information he had but he is wrong to avoid questioning in Sweden;
2. Assange was wrong to release the information he had but he is right to avoid questioning in Sweden;
3. Assange was right to release the information he had and he is right to avoid questioning in Sweden;
4. Assange was wrong to release the information and he is wrong to avoid questioning.
People here seem to assume it’s a case of either 3 or nothing.
It is perfectly possible for someone who acts nobly in one sphere to act ignobly in another.
My personal belief is a bit more nuanced than any of those; I don’t object to his release of information, although I understand why governments need to keep some things secret. I do find it a bit hypocritical that he didn’t release all the information he had (where it was ‘safe’ to do so) but kept some back for personal reasons.
I simply don’t think that his release of that information necessarily has anything to do with the accusations made against him. I can’t see why being prepared to release information means he’s incapable of sexual offences.
As I don’t know, I prefer to be guided by the courts. I know he has one of the best legal teams possible. I believe the UK courts to be as fair as any in the world. That being so, I assume they’ve made the decision to extradite him on sound grounds, after considering all the evidence.
by zoomster on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:34 pm
It is hardly surprising that TLM and Confessions would agree on this … the common thread is … How dare this slime discomfort the USA
by swamprat on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:35 pm
No bemused not at a joke at all … I find the Assange situation very sobering … and while I think he should be allowed to return to Australia and die of old age as a complete nobody … I am sure the lock him away forever group is at least as intelligent and as informed as he scary cheer club. He is not a journalist, he does nothing for democracy … his only apparent inclination is to anarchy … and you’ll probably find most Australians, lib, lab and other are NOT fans of anarchy … those who support anarchy are supposed to be between 14 and 17 and expressing a juvenile and pointless angst against the order of the soul …
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:35 pm
Is there any guarantee he won’t?
That’s the pertinent question.
by kezza2 on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:36 pm
I am not in the lynch mob and I’ve read lots of your stuff and you just seem to have an incredibly weak understanding of the rule of law ….
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:37 pm
According to the Guardian, Assange has a couple of options from here.
Either he gives himself up, tries to make the risky run to Ecuador, or he stays in the embassy. Interestingly, a Hungarian Cardinal, József Mindszenty was tried for treason, but escaped and spent 15 years in the American embassy in Budapest from 1956 to 1971.
A reader in the Guardian who visited the embassy says that it is very small, and probably won’t be big enough for Assange to live in for very long. It consists of about 5 rooms, the Ambassador’s being the largest, a hallway, and 4 smaller offices.
by Von Kirsdarke on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:37 pm
In practice, you can’t be sure even then that this applies. Even if you utterly trust your partner, using a condom is the wisest course unless you plan to conceive. Would you want to transmit candida albicans, for example? Warts? Of course not. You also don’t want unplanned pregnancy.
Condoms should be the default choice, IMO.
On the broader r@pe question — IMO the key question ought to be the reasonableness of the parties belief that consent had been given. In practice a lot of consensual sex happens in circumstances which, fortunately for the parties, is never tested in court. Certainly, especially outside of a committed relationship, I’d recommend erring seriously on the side of certainty, assuring yourself that each step really was being welcomed by the other party allowing them scope to say no thanks. It is after all, not merely penetration we are discussing, but the whole of the intimacy that is in question. If there really is consent, taking things slowly won’t make it less pleasurable or less certain. If there isn’t consent, then a lot of distress can be avoided.
I don’t pretend to know how any of this bears upon the Assange matter. On the face of it, the case seems to be in the grey area and is now so bound up with the political matters it is hard to know what to make of the matter. It would be far better if the Swedish authorities gave a firm and unconditional undertaking not to extradite Assange under any circumstances. In the interim, I’m sympathetic to his current course of action.
by Fran Barlow on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:37 pm
WeWantPaul
You have not addressed the question.
by guytaur on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:38 pm
I don’t care what you are speaking honestly about and I don’t care that you want me to give me my opinion on a topic that I don’t care much about.
by ShowsOn on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:38 pm
He clearly has more options than he deserves and a lot more options than Bradley Manning … if there is a hero here and that is quite unlikely Pte Manning is ahead of ‘look at me’ Assange by about 3000 years.
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:39 pm
I don’t think you’ve asked a sensible one, but feel free to try again.
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:39 pm
WeWantPaul
Your argument is an argument more puerile than the 14-17 year olds you talk about.
So “he is not a journalist”? what does that mean given that “journalists” are liars?
by swamprat on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:40 pm
swamprat @ 4671
Indeed. They actually have a lot in common I think. A certain blind dogmatism.
by bemused on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:40 pm
Evan is under the impression that the Equator enjoys diplomatic recognition.
by Jake on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:40 pm
I would like Sweden to guarantee that Assange will not be extradited from that country to anywhere else.
Then let him go to Sweden to be interviewed or better still Swedish authorities can interview him in the UK.
I do not see where that is not fair. Then if they want to charge him, get him extradited.
I have no idea what he is or what he has done. I do not have enough information to make a judgement but I have cannot see why it should be so hard for Sweden to question him without all this kerfuffle.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:42 pm
zoom
So you believe in 4:
wrong to release info (because mere moron citizens shouldn’t know what’s really going on) –
and he should face questioning over something he’s already been questioned about, a Swedish prosecutor saying he had no case to answer, and allowed to leave the country, but has to face up to again.
Tell me again, which side you would have been on if Wikileaks had condemned Howard.
by kezza2 on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:43 pm
WeWantPaul
In my eyes Manning is exactly as Ellsberg described him if the allegations are correct. A true hero and patriot.
I do not like Assange. However that does not blind me to legitimate questions raised in regard to actions of authorities regarding Assange.
by guytaur on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:43 pm
WeWantPaul
You express concern for the rule of law.
Who has been charged over what was revealed in “Collateral Murder”?
What were their roles in those murders?
What were their sentences?
by bemused on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:43 pm
Wow, Jake,
Got anything else to contribute besides as hominems.
by Pegasus on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:44 pm
I get it a journalist is someone employed by New Limited. Yes I agree Assange, and many of us, are NOT journalists nor ever will be.
by swamprat on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:44 pm
Debonlay
I, for one, have supported the Gillard government program and her Prime Ministership; I think she has done a good job.
I will be entirely devoted to punishing her and her government in the event anything untoward happens to Assange; whether they are directly responsible or not.
Our lickspittle attitude to Foreign Policy has to be punished severely; this is a good issue to rally the crucial 1-2% of the vote to that end. Assange supporters are likely to be Green or Labour. Labour is a government looking for re-election. The timing is fortuitous, and can really make a difference.
Extradition to Sweden in itself is fine; but the Atheist Gillard better be praying he does not get renditioned to the US, because I certainly will not be the only one holding my nose as I vote for Anthony Abbott.
I think Labour supporters have to come to terms with the reality that it is 3 years of LNP starting 2013, or 10 years of LNP starting 2016.
by JohD on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:45 pm
WeWantPaul
In not addressing my reasonable question regarding Swedish actions regarding Assange you have proven yourself to be part of the lynch mob.
by guytaur on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:45 pm
Thanks but that kind of abuse pretty much sums up the pro side, I’m going to bed, feel free to spew bile at someone else.
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:46 pm
All that.
However given that the opinion of most of his opponents here would be reversed if this were a Howard government we might surmise much of it is to do with Gillard’s instant attack on Assange, thus deciding the opinions on Assange of people here.
If Gillard came out tomorrow and did a 180 on Assange and supported him and openly questioned the Swedish justice system. Well many here would do the same 180 and find ways to rationalise that change.
It is my observation that the great majority of attackers of Assange here are so because of Gillard’s attitude to him, and nothing more. Which is a worry, that people’s sense of justice, human rights and ‘leftness’ is entirely dictated by there object of idolatry, rather than common reason.
This should not be surprising as 5 seconds before gillard took over everybody saw the Pacific solution as evil, 5 seconds later it was the sensible and right thing to do.
And for some issues you might ask what people’s position on certain issues would be if it were Howard PM, and if it is become the opposite under gillard you know a corruption of reason has occurred.
by Thomas Paine. on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:46 pm
You idiot.
Sweden have tried to have Assange present himself in front of their legal system to address questions of sexual misconduct. So for the UK courts have agreed Sweden is in the right. I’m not sure what you could imagine Sweden or the UK have done wrong … it is really tinfoil hat stuff …
by WeWantPaul on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:48 pm
Because England is just as bad as Australia in brown-nosing the Yanks.
by kezza2 on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:48 pm
Fran and Puff
I agree Sweden could solve this quicly by publicly agreeing to blocking US rendition attempts.
by guytaur on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:49 pm
Is there a problem with the Swedish Justice system ?
Are their standards of Justice lower than ours ?
So they have Guilt untill innocence proved or something ?
by Mick Collins on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:51 pm
kezza
I made up my mind about wikileaks long before it was clear that nothing was going to be released on Howard.
That’s because I’m used to working in areas where certain information must remain confidential.
I appreciate that governments sometimes keep information back that they shouldn’t, but any release of information deemed to be confidential must be undertaken very carefully.
by zoomster on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:51 pm
Michael Danby a few months ago was very publicly attacking Rudd & supporting Gillard, yet today he’s seen in public having lunch with the same K. Rudd & Joel Fitzgibbon – something’s brewing.
And yes, it was tweeted by Latika Bourke & other Canberra journos.
by Thornleigh Labor Man on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:51 pm
JohD
I agree. Well written. Though I will NEVER vote for Abbott. I just don’t complete my form in those situations.
Australia can be a strong self confident country standing up for itself. The Labor and Liberal Parties deny us that self respect.
I must admit the Greens are everywhere and very disappointing.
by swamprat on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:51 pm
Every democracy every generation require the Assanges and the like whistle blower types.
Those people who for whatever reason expose and reveal the under belly of the way government has been working ‘on their behalf’.
People willing to see Assange put away, punished and whatever are preferring an environment where whistle blowers and revealers of truths are punished and the practice become so dangerous as to cease entirely.
Even when we think the are wrong, and maybe they are sometimes wrong, you still have to support them, if only to protect the environment that lets occur from time to time.
by Thomas Paine. on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:53 pm
WeWantPaul
Now you are proving yourself the idiot. As Kezza has pointed out repeatedly, seemingly to no avail. Assange has been questioned by the Swedes in Sweden before getting permission to leave the country.
I have reasonably asked why the Swedes have not gone for questioning in London as it is cheaper and would ascertain to the Swedes if an arrest nd thus extradition is really worth the expense of a court case and ll that entails.
Then Fran and Puff point out another commonsense point. Sweden could stop all this in its tracks. Guarantee no rendition to he US.
So why not do this?
by guytaur on Jun 20, 2012 at 11:55 pm