Roy Morgan seems to have moved to weekly face-to-face polls, today’s offering being a survey of 955 voters conducted on Saturday and Sunday (so before the early week leadership non-event). It shows a 1 per cent shift in the Coalition’s direction on two-party preferred, with both major parties up on the primary vote: the Coalition from 34.5 per cent to 36 per cent, Labor from 49 per cent to 51 per cent.
Just to give you the maths. Most of the suggested sites for nuclear power stations are in moderately safe coalitions seats of around 10%. That is 25 power stations. Can I see the Tampa coming?
Lets assume that Rudd doesn’t do a Latham but campaigns like say Beazley (obviously starting much higher) and lets assume that if there is a problem with the way it measures National party votes, it will be similar to what happened in 2001
Here are the Morgan figures for Sept 8/9 and Election Nov 10
Lib 34.5 37.4
Nat 2 5.7
ALP 40.5 37.8
Dem 7 5.4
Green 7 5
One N 3.5 5.4
Others 5.5 4.4
Now
Lib 34
Nat 2
ALP 51
Dem 1
Green 6
One N .5
Family F 2
Others 3.5
read into it what you like
Only if you ignore the emissions associated with mining, milling, and transporting the uranium, building and decommissioning the power plants, and disposing of the waste.
The actual _fission_ does not produce carbon dioxide, but that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Glen, youve moved from trying spin awful polls to discussing the details of nuclear energy policy…do you give up on the polls now??
[Rupert Says:
September 14th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Bluebottle, you really are quite offensive by suggesting that I have used vulgar language. I have not.]
My, quite the little lord Fauntelroy, aren’t we? Certainly not a member of the vulgar throng.
If I can paraphrase the definition of a gentleman, it is “one who never gives offense unintentionally”.
Well rupert , you are the most offensive, ignorant little twerp that I have come across.
By the way, I consider myself a gentle man.
William, I don’t espouse censorship. I disagree utterly with glen et al, & sometimes think their contribution go beyond reasonable bounds.. as sometimes do those of people I agree with. But I really can’t recall a single entry by Rupert which is not personally directed, and without any substantive point whatsoever. Is there anything that can be done?
J-D you missed the fact we need to enrich the uranium too, but we won’t be allowed to do it, so we will have to send it overseas and then import our own uranium. There will be emissions based on the shipping of it.
As others have said, the economics behind it don’t work.
Glen and other Lib lovers are always espousing how great nuclear is because it’s 0 emission. The US has nuclear power yet is one of the highest emitters in the world.
Needless to say the nuclear industry will not invest in nuclear unless there is bipartisan support. It takes too long to set up and it’s too risky if a government changes.
Men wot sing.
farewell johnny howard 🙂
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_thxvG4iAI
Ummm…and what about the nuclear waste? And considering we’re in the driest country in the world currently gripped by a 10 year drought (and counting), should we really be investing in power generation that uses a LOT of water? Nuclear energy is not carbon neutral. It uses carbon in the enrichment process, in transporting it.
The idea that solar, wind, geothermal and tidal energy generation cannot provide base load power is just disinformation and fear spread by the “feral” right.
ifonly, of course you fail to mention that that Morgan was taken before 11 September 2001, an event which made it impossible for the ALP to win the 2001 election.
I’m still of the opinion the ALP won’t quite get enough seats to win the election, but lets not try and delude ourselves by looking at the polls from 2001, there’s no similarity at all.
this thread is for the morgan poll isnt it??
Re Glen’s list:
#1 .http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull413/article1.pdf
Glen that is a link to an article that lists various types of nuclear accidents 1945-1999 see page 13 and 14.
Between 120-150 of them.
Not counting the 2 that occurred this year, 1 in Sweden, 1 in Japan.
#3 see link
#4. Nuclear energy has high levels of carbon emissions due to the nature of its ore and builing requirements.
Switowski estimates it at about 10% but 40% is closer.
Thats compared to coal.
#5. Sorry Glen CSIRO have stated that renewable energy can provide all of Aust.’s baseload power within 7 years.
See this link
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=news&subclass=environment&story_id=483163&category=environment&m=5&
I often wonder if the country might be a little better off if people spent less time on these sorts of blogs talking about polls, and more time talking about policy.
After all, isn’t that what it’s all about? Why would anyone be interested in politics if not for policy?
Regarding Glen’s ignorant attitude over nuclear –
You take a few facts for nuclear, and try to fight the overwhelming argurment against nuclear.
You must look at the big picture if you want what’s best (which money is not the answer obviously).
“1. The only major nuclear accident was in Soviet Russia about 20 years ago and only happened because they shut down the safe guards…”
There have been hundreds of serious nuclear disasters. The two main being the Three Mile Island and the Chernobyl disasters. And it wasn’t because they shut down the safeguards. “Supporters of nuclear power argue that this accident occurred due to several critical design flaws”
“2. Australia has 30% known reserves of Uranium and yet we dont enrich it or use it for power generation.”
But, it is expected that uranium will only last a further 30-60 years. It will be 10-20 years before nuclear plants are stabalised. Plus, the uranium will run out in say 50 years, and then what about considering the future generations need for uranium?
“3. Nuclear energy is safe and almost fool proof…the Europeans have nuclear energy and are expanding their programmes like the French who use 80% Nuclear.”
The toxic waste is lethal and must be specially stored and done so in the right manner for 10,000 years before you can feel safe.
“4. Nuclear Energy has Zero thats right Zero Carbon Emissions and yet Garrett says Nuclear power should not be a part of the solution…”
Only if storgae of the toxic waste is done in the right manner, which would be difficult to maintain.
“5. As much as solar, wind, geothermal and tidal or all well and good they as yet cannot provide base load power and clean coal technology is decades off…”
That’s right we have solar, wind, geothermal and tidal alternativs now that must be, and can be held solely responsible for the future, if you want the best outcomes enough. Wind power is especially becoming a seriosly largely accountable option as you would know if you wacthed documnetary’s, listened to scientists and read.
Not to mention the lethal outcomes devised by terrorists and criminals such as nuclear weapons, and imagine if a nuclear plants were a targets for terrorists, it would impact the whole world.
Glen – the other possibility for the low Nats polling (and let’s also remember here that the polling has been CONSISTENTLY low; every polling company and over months) is that the Liberal Party has moved so far to the right that many non-rural Nat voters have simply shifted their vote to the Libs. There are, no doubt, still many rural Nat voters, but those on the city fringes are no longer voting that way. I’ve seen it myself in the Adelaide Hills. Electorates like Mayo federally and Kavel and Heysen in the state have had a dwindling Nat vote for many years and are now at historic lows. These votes have moved across to the Libs or maybe to One Nation or conservative independents, but nowhere else.
The practical upshot is that it’s still a vote for the Coalition. No way any other these people would shift across to Labor, the Greens or any other left-wing party, so your argument about nett Coalition primary is spurious, to put it mildly.
Also to add, refer to my answer to point #2. uranium wont last all that long, hence nuclear power is NOT renewable energy, as claimed by the right liars.
Tim: too true about the water thing. Nuclear stations use steam turbines, so you have the water loss there, and on top of that you have water in the cooling process and that water can’t be reused.
The thing about nuclear stations in NQ, is that the water will run off, or at least seep out in to the sea and out to the Barrier Reef. Those who say it won’t happen only has to look at the coral bleaching which is occurring due to chemicals from farming.
Fred, your link at #1 is a good one … there’s also reliable old wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_nuclear_accidents
The only way to make nukes feasible is to have a military requirement and a very big military budget.
I agree I don’t think the alp will get enough seat in this election, if the ALP don’t pick up a straight draw the top 16 marginal they will start to run into seats like Corangamite, … and I cant see labor wining this seat at all, too many local issues, but he would still have a majority backing, also in Corangamite the labor candidate live in another town one and half hours out of the electorate… he is a very young chap, doesn’t really know the local issues that well, and was a union official..
Labor did have a strong candidate x-mayor, big name recognition but they dumped him because of factional in fighting … this will really hurt labor in this seat,I wonder how many seats labor is doing this in?
Gimplander is a hoot! Jolly good show!
“I say the Nat vote is too low…
You say its because people chose the Liberals instead…
Then i say its because of the city bias…”
Glen, RTFP.
I showed to you how even if the undercounting occurs because of a city bias that misses country areas, you still can’t take the full difference from the ALP heap, because there are (believe it or not) some ALP voters in those country areas who will also be missed.
Even if the undercounting occurs because only Nats voters are missed (which is unlikely) then you still can’t take the full difference from the ALP heap.
You can only do that if Nats voters are miscounted as ALP voters, for which no mechanism has been suggested.
Centre: I’m inclined to agree 😉
Glen may well be correct on the nuclear issue. After all those devious euopean supporters of Kyoto have to a large and continuing extent, shut down their fossil fuel power generation in favour of nuclear. They almost certainly hope to benefit big time from carbon credits.
However this doesn’t help Howard, as the current public mood in Oz is clearly against nuclear power generation, whatever the merits or otherwise. This is clearly a campaign positive for Labor
I suppose Rudd was being a hypocrite when he expected the Libs would go negative on him on the campaign…but it seems the last 2 ALP ads have been negative and simply a scare campaign with no facts just like the ACTU’s workchoices ads…what interesting the only Liberal Party ad has been that the States are to blame for interest rates…the Labor Party have had half a dozen or more different ads on…but i suppose that’s because they’ve got a massive war chest to spend on the election…interesting to see if the Libs are just waiting for the campaign to deliver a spectacular L plate campaign on the ALP team…more focus should be on the Rudd team…
Swan, Alabanese, Burke, Macklin, Smith, Garrett, Roxon…
Pat 95…actually Australia was about to build a nuclear power station at Jervis Bay (ACT) in the late 60s early 1970s under the Liberal Gorton Government…unfortunately McMahon got in a canceled it for economic and technical reasons…we did have the ability and we still do.
I have one question that I would love to see answered. What’s best a long election campaign or a short one. From memory short ones seem to work better for incumbents and any time a struggling government goes long doesn’t seem to work out. I would love to see that one answered though.
Fred: thanks for the link. And let’s not forget geothermal – the area around Birdsville is extremely suitable for that Energy source.
My question is: where would a Rudd-led Labor government stand on this issue?
Glen, I am interested to hear your views about Costello becoming PM (in a few years, that is). Given that Costello has no prior leadership experience as either PM or opposition leader, shall I presume that you will be voting for Rudd? After all, Rudd has more leadership experience than Costello.
Another poll like this and the election date will be 2008. Please, please just look at the last 48 hours and see for yourself how devious JWH will use every trick still legal to extend his stay at Kirrilli until the bitter end. The election is lost and it is all about “Him”. Oh.. if he can shred Costello at the same time then he would feel that might be as good as it gets.
Hey Glen, dont worry!
You’ll be laughing on election night.
latest from the OZ, they say Howards strategy may cost him more votes than he’ll gain.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22417740-601,00.html
Do tell, BrissyRod. I’m sure Glen could use a chuckle now.
It may, but if the Labor Party as it is currently playing on it, it will lose them votes. Policy alone will win labor the election but ads ridiculing the man or men is plain stupid… just like in 2004 and 2001 people just get turned off by this nonsense.
marky marky 127 – Is this coming from a person who supports a party that has done it’s best to discredit Rudd’s character over this year – unsuccessfully I might add. Remember the failed Brian Burke slur, just to mention one failed attempt. What a hypocrite.
How do we know any criticism of Costello cost Labor votes in past elections by the way? I think there were many more important issues happening at the time. Costello is not popular full stop.
The GG reports on its poll. (10,000+ votes)
“Overall, the survey reports that 52 per cent of respondents will not be voting for the Coalition, but of online readers’ support for Labor is softer in Western Australia, at 45.7 per cent, and Queensland, at 47.9 per cent, than the headline poll numbers suggest.”
So using very rubbery logic, if we assume that these are primary votes (within Morgan’s MOE at 51) its bloodbath time.
Surely the GG isn’t taking their online vote seriously. They are desperate.
This one is a great poll.
It confirms that the last one wasn’t an outlier but the two 55s were.
It confirms ALP primary is very high and firm.
It confirms Liberal primary is stuck very low.
66% people think the Labor will win the election. This gels with the betting market.
It confirms that the trend is actually slightly back to Labor – which is fantastic, there being no drift back to the Govt as you would normally expect from such high figures.
This is just about as good as it can get for Labor. You might dream of and get another percentage point but I doubt there can be much more stretch.
The longer Labor keep this trend flat and the margin wide the better their chances are of wining and of wining by a large margin. Every week sucks a little oxygen from the Govt.
AND this is before the leadership melt down.
You have to be crazy if you are not ecstatic with this poll.
Glen says — the Labor Party have had half a dozen or more different ads on…but i suppose that’s because they’ve got a massive war chest to spend on the election
we the long suffering public have been billed $millions for Howards re-election ads so far Glen, all disguised as information ads.
The Sky news poll still has the coalition winning easily. Looks like we were all wrong.
Yes i agree the Libs have been absolutely pathetic, but just because they have been does not mean Labor should duplicate such actions.. Labor still needs 16 seats to win office… and yes the polls look good but swings may occur in safe Liberal and Labor seats..
And yes Costello is unpopular but targeting people in my experience turns people off and all the liberals efforts this year you must admit have upset people and admittedly if Labor does it the same will occur..
This yet could be a close election… to me Labor should stick to policy and spend its advertising dollar on positive ads instead of negative ones…
“My Precious …”
If I like it, it’s mine.
If I think it’s mine, it’s mine.
If it’s in my hand, it’s mine.
If I can take it from you, it’s mine.
If I had it a while ago, it’s mine.
If it looks just like mine, it’s mine.
If it’s nailed down but I can pry it loose it’s mine.
If I am doing or building something, all the pieces are mine.
If it’s mine, it must never appear to be yours in any way.
It’s mine and I won’t find it easy if I am re-elected to retire.
It’s mine and I won’t find it the least bit easy, because I am very committed to my precious, and I will not like leaving it.
Watch my precious!!! Who wants to steal my precious???
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200709/r176075_669985.asx
“Thief, thief, thief! Ruddins! We hates it, we hates it, we hates it for ever!”
“Where iss it, where iss it: my Precious, my Precious? It’s ours, it is, and we wants it. The thieves, the thieves, the filthy little thieves. Where are they with my Precious? Curse them! We hates them.”
122# Noocat
Actually Noocat i believe Costello has been deputy leader of the Liberal Party for 12 years and Treasurer for 11 years…id say thats more leadership experience than 1 year being Opposition leader and a couple as shadow foreign affairs spokesperson…
132#
Actually there is a difference all the Commonwealth ads on dont have John Howard saying he’s a fiscal conservative or trashing the ALP…whereas Labor’s ads have far more benefit for them in the polls especially…
“Maybe the Mill thing in Tassie is keeping him up all night- but he was terribly unimpressive and NOONE stood by him, no one.”
Bluebottle, there is a suspicion mentioned in the media (unconfirmed and quite possibly untrue) in the Lib camp that it was Turnbull who leaked this stuff to Sky News. After Howard put his foot down, I’d suspect everybody is going around pretending not to know Turnbull.
The Coventry treatment might’ve led to his distraction more than the pulp mill problems. I hope he stands his ground on that, by the way. It won’t cost him any general public support.
[Actually Noocat i believe Costello has been deputy leader of the Liberal Party for 12 years and Treasurer for 11 years…id say thats more leadership experience than 1 year being Opposition leader and a couple as shadow foreign affairs spokesperson…]
He has zero leadership experience. Whenever he is given the chance to show some leadership, he rolls over and plays dead. He doesn’t deserve to lead the country because he thinks he has a better chance of winning the election, but he won’t even take the leadership from Howard. Why should anyone trust a person to lead the country who doesn’t even have enough guts to lead his own political party?
Sky News’ poll now has 54% for the Coalition, 42% ALP, 2% Other and 2% undecided.
Feel free to vote!
http://www2.skynews.com.au/
Simon so by your logic a vice president has no leadership experience…get with the programme…Costello has been deputy leader of the Libs for 12 years which gives him more leadership experience than Rudd will have in his political life!
Simon he would not only ensure a Liberal loss if he challenged but the simple fact is he couldn’t challenge even if he wanted to for a simple explanation…
HE DOES NOT HAVE THE NUMBERS!
Why would you try and destroy your party when you knew you couldnt win??? Get real Simon.
Costello makes jelly look like concrete.
#135 Brilliant Pauline. But probably wasted on those it is aimed at.
Unfortunately there is a group of people who do not understand irony.
For example the people that Borat was aimed at: that is those who believe the Confederate army didn’t lose the war. Wouldn’t understand it. Same goes with your brilliant piece of work.
Why are the Sky News polls so right wing biased? I presume it’s a reflection of high pay television subscription rates in rural areas?
How does 54% compare to previous elections I wonder. Is 60ish more the norm? (my vague memory).
127
marky marky says Says:
September 14th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
It may, but if the Labor Party as it is currently playing on it, it will lose them votes. Policy alone will win labor the election but ads ridiculing the man or men is plain stupid… just like in 2004 and 2001 people just get turned off by this nonsense.
They aren’t ridiculing the men. They are simply pointing out the obvious. If the obvious happens to be worthy of ridicule, that isn’t the ALP’s fault. That is the Libs fault for making the decision in the first place ;-D
Some of those TV polls are easy to rig. A party with a lot of money has a robot to do the work.