The increasingly unpredictable Roy Morgan has released a face-to-face survey of 797 voters conducted just over a week ago, showing Labor’s two-party lead up to 60-40 from 59-41 at the larger poll conducted over the two previous weekends. Both Labor (48 per cent) and the Coalition (34.5 per cent) are down 0.5 per cent on the primary vote, with the Greens spiking from 8 per cent to 11.5 per cent, mostly at the expense of “independent/others” (down from 6 per cent to 3.5 per cent).
William… a few corrections / quibbles for the WA site.
Vic Park: the suburb should be Karawara, not Karawatha.
Gosnells: You’ve got Chris Tallentire in bold… if bold means current member, he isn’t – it’s still Sheila McHale. Tallentire’s the ALP candidate for this election. Also, there’s a broken link to Kenwick (the abolished seat).
Vasse also has a broken link on the main page – there’s a capital V instead of lowercase v in the URL.
And for Cannington… Bill Johnston’s been in the papers a fair bit, surely there’s a better photo of him than that. 😉
Great work Bird, those are corrected – except Bill Johnston, due to my scrupulousness (most of the time) about copyright.
It’s becoming hard to see how the Queensland Liberals and Nationals can survive the rest of the week without developing a permanent and nasty split. The question of who will be Big Chief Pineapple still has them scratching their heads.
It has all the hallmarks of the last Queensland election where their problem was fighting between the Liberals and Nationals over who would be the Premier if the coalition had won. This whole process of merging was supposed to solve this dilemma but it seems to have solved nothing.
Seems like both parties are about to descend into a farcical circus of delay and uncertainty which is exactly what they have done with policy development for the past decade. Perhaps the merger will become a going concern the day after their tree clearing policy is announced but I can’t see that policy being announced before the end of the week either.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24057292-5006786,00.html
Predictable… more Messiah Complex eminating from the News Limited boiler room.
Malcolm Colless in today’s Australian asks “What is the government offering with its ETS Green Paper”:
… as if making the planet sustainable environmentally for those we love and wish the best for is some kind of fuzzy, optional thing. What a bloody cynic this man is.
Further on, he writes:
As I predicted, the first signs that the advertising campaign itself will be the issue, not the substance of its message.
Lastly we have The Murdoch Bootstrapping Campaign Of The Week: “Costello for PM”, which started in Saturday’s Weekend Australian, was editorialized in the Sunday Telegraph (“We need Costello”) and now is, apparently, established mainstream fact in the the Wally-World of News Limited’s opinion orifices. No chance of a “spin machine” operating at Chateau Murdoch… of course not, only Labor has one of those:
Fat chance of that Malcolm Colless. Costello has had his chances. He’s a lazy, gutless, wannabee, afraid of his own shadow and totally unsuited to lead a lunchtime tip football team, much less an entire nation. Without a tame Speaker to gag his opponents he’s just another loudmouthed tall-guy, alternating between shouting from the bleachers and maintaining an enigmatic silence. In short, he has nothing useful to say except, “I resign.”
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/yoursay/index.php/theaustralian/comments/listless_lib_leaders/
Speaking of Queensland, there was a spot on Premier Anna Bligh in Australian story on the ABC last night. It seemed reasonably balanced. One thing I never realised was that, since Kirner was defeated, no woman has ever won an election to be Premier in Australian history! I hope that changes soon….
#101
I think I prefer Karawatha. Sounds like it might be on the banks of Gitche Gumee. Here’s a pic from the good streets.
http://theworstofperth.com/2008/07/04/blood-sausage/
Out with it man! tell us how you really feel about Tip 😉
Bushfire Bill
#104
I do not see the point of wasting 22 mill on add campaign if its to sell why emmissions need reducton My post #98 shows polling that that point is already sold to voters
But the adds & Paper will still miss the point I’ve mentioned , that Malcolm Colless you quoted has now highlighted Rudd & ETS are saying there will be less ‘dirty’ energy available to use & it will cost more (via ETS & reduced permits) So ‘theoreticaly’ there will be less ‘dirty’ enegy to run refrigerators & aircons etc for voters & less dirty energy available to run machines for bussiness ‘Theoreticaly’ Rudd is saying he’s taking us back to the Stone Age , (since behavoural change & energy efficencys won’t offset the enrgy lost differense) That’s the “hole” , I’ve been suggesting Ruddy has left open for voters to doubt whats going to happen to their refrigerators etc
Of couse , the Rudd man is not taking us back to a ‘theoretical Stone Age at all Instead he has a 20% renewal Target by 2020 , plus a yet undefined schem to have R E up to 45,000 gigawatt-hours by then Part of that undefined R E scheme I suspect is the Rudd “process” & part of his schem probably relies on his various ‘Paper’ options listed incl rebates etc But the MAJORITY of the ‘transition’ to R E , I suspect relyes on the ETS through ‘market forses’ , itself creating the new private enterprise renewable industries I doubt those ‘market forses’ , given the Wall Street collapse experience , will produce enough new R E industries with sufficent replacement of dirty’ energy power , that bussiness & consumers will demand to breavailable & be able to use So
I’ve sufggested a Ruddy new Snowy River type scheme , a super solar grid , so that the figerators , aircons & machines can still run in 2020 , rather than as I suspect , still be forced to use ‘dirty’ energy (if insufficent R E industries are created ) Also I don’t thingk 20% R E by 2020 is high enough Perhaps there is nothing to wory about at all
Hi William
Your WA 2008 election guide is great.
Is Dawesville missing for a good reason?
Ronnie, I agree with your “Big Idea” idea. Something to sell as a bright future, rather than a dour slog against the odds, ending in misery and horse-and-buggy days all over again. It’s a matter of how you slant it. A giant solar farm sounds about right, with new decentralized urban development to go along with it. I don’t think Rudd has really “sold” us on Climate Change yet. A lot of what we see in the polls is good faith and momentum therefrom. I don’t like “faith” as a foundation for a major political and economic platform.
The polls are just that… polls. Your assumption (and the assumption of many others here) is that the public has irrevocably made up its mind and won’t change it, no matter what the Climate Deniers (disguised as ETS critics, like Colless, Bolt and just about everybody else at Chateau Murdoch) spout as economic “wisdom”. These people are telling us that we need to know more about the ETS and where we’re going on Climate Change. They’re whispering in our ears that it’s “OK” to whinge about saving the planet, because in our heart of hearts we know Global Warming is a crock. It’s easy to just write these poisonous writers off as total lunatics, in the face of the polls you quote.
But there are two arguments against that.
One is that I think there’s a kernel of truth in what they say. I’ve yet to meet more than two people in the one place at the one time who understand the concept of an ETS, or alternatively who don’t believe the future for us all holds nothing but gloom and doom, ETS or no ETS.
The second is that we deserve to know the full truth, and to have something to look forward to, other than Rudd’s quasi-Calvinistic “blood, sweat and tears”. Bugger the polls. We should be fully informed and energized. Rudd owes us hope. That’s why we elected him. To go off a few polls that are showing people are – sort-of – convinced is lazy, especially if you believe this will apply forever more. 70% ”
believers” is one thing. That there are still up to 30% of punters out there who don’t believe a word of Global Warming is a disgrace.
Opinions change, especially where there’s ignorance fuelling them.. ignorance from both sides. One Rudd’s side the voters are essentially fuzzy about just what the future under a Climate Change economy holds for us.
On the Doubters’ side, the voters are hearing the siren song that this is all just touchy-feely, inner-glow, feel-good stuff. Too much of this – without rebuttal – and they might start to believe it’s all a rort, or a tax-grab by Rudd, just like the Doubters are saying, not something that needs to be done and done fast.
I find it touching, but not reassuring, that there is so much simplistic faith in a paid advertising campaign doing the trick. Even here at this blog this is the case. We’ve just seen how the Work Choices campaign failed, despite some of the best spruiking minds in the country being behind it. The Global Warming/Climate Change campaign can fail too.
Leadership by advertising campaign is no excuse for actual leadership. I thought we’d learnt that lesson, but clearly not. Relying on poll results that actually show a slight diminuition of support from record highs, and anyway uncover a large section of the community still as Doubters gives me no comfort at all.
Bushfire
I think the analogy with worstchoices was apt in a sense-you cant put lipstick on a pig BUT CC is not a pig so the “lipstick” aint necessary
what is needed is to make CC a mainstream issue WITH the MSM -not joe or joeline but the trogs in control.
Worstchoices was shite pure and simple and the grassroots campaign ensured that the public was kept alarmed and bloody alert about the loss of basic rights-so no matter what the MSM said it never gained a foothold.
Conversely CC has been on the boil for yonks among the grassroots -the issue is how to legitimise it to the MSM-voila sell it via the MSM
ps most joes and joelins know CC is real in some aspect,only the MSM have to be dragged into the equations.
And just how do you propose to do that, seeing as “most joes and joelins” rely on the MSM for their daily news input? We’re talking here about a group of people that only just figured out Big Brother was a crock of $hit and wasn’t worth watching.
In the meantime the MSM were prepared to dish it up to them.
Bushfire
as i said the move is on now to sell it to the MSM itself,the punters aint dumb when an issue that affects their core standards comes into play viz worstchoices
BB @ 109
Good observations.
The issue needs to be de-politicised to allow the partisan 30% to be objective – most of whom are opposing it because Labor has the initiative, not on the merits of the arguments.
I remember all too well the Australia Card (60%+ support at one time). It was embraced by the conservatives until they realised there was a great political opportunity in opposing it – and so spawned the successful scare campaign and an evil looking Labor as a result. This isn’t a comment on the AC but an observation of the political imperatives (for both sides) which accompany any major programme.
GW is a different beast altogether but, as you’ve stated BB, Rudd needs to work much harder to convince – and inform – more Australians but, more importantly, shame the Libs into bipartisanship. If the Libs jump on board the 30% will largely disappear.
I’d also like to point out that a lot of the opposition to the WCs campaign was simply against the government using taxpayers’ money for it.
Colless, in his column, is already characterizing the campaign as a “spin machine” thing, i.e. “not real”.
It was plain as the nose on anyone’s face that this tactic – attack the campaign itself, ignore its substance – would be used.
There are people opposed to Rudd. They will use any rationalization to oppose him. “Hypocrisy” in running an ad campaign and “using taxpayers’ money” would rank high in the list of possible reasons why this campaign can fail. A 30 second TV commercial (or even a 60 second one, or even a 90 minute-long one like An Inconvenient Truth) isn’t enough to fully (or indeed, even partially) inform anyone if they don’t have goodwill towards it, or switch off because they “always vote Liberal”.
Well Bushfire Bill
You hav a valid point re polls , i actualy deleted the 2nd half of my propposed post , which dealt with th polls first I wanted to establish a view we are ‘theoreticaly’ going to the Stone Ages , becaue the ‘dirty’ energy is to be reuced via ETS & reduced permits And that ‘market forses’ supposedly are going to self create these magical R E industries to make up for the ‘dirty’ enegy that ETS cuts out The point being that efficiencys , behavoural change & govt incentive rebates etc to switch solar won’t make up the shortfall Furthermore gambling on carbon catiure & storage techno is just that , a gamble that may or may not occur
Now to the bit i didn’t address , the politcs & the polls I’m quoting polls showing CC support NOW , and gusface is essentially right there is solid suport NOW However but I think that CC suport ‘erodable’ both by the Libs on politcal grounds & by rich powerful vested intrerests like big Oily Exxons & big energy companies like Coal Co’s What the scare Lib campaign will be , and silky toff Turn has already startd , is we the ‘oz’ are ‘suckers’ , the scare will be at the hip pocket & job security , the scare can be the rest of the world are not moving as fast , so Rudd will export jobs to poluting countries There IS some validness in this as the US ain’t gonna move quick so ‘oz’ jobs could get exported EVEN to the US , the ultimate insult seeing they polute the earthwith gay abandons , and be exported to other dev & less dev Countries
So give a voter a start choice between his CC heart & his hip pockeys and his job security , he will go for the hip pocket mullah and his job securitys , electoral history proves this This could be a reverse wedge on Labor , a reverse workchoices scare campaign , Libs can advertise the Libs are protecting ‘oz’ jobs , whereas th Lib spin line can be Labor are exporting them a suckers , instead of a Lib plan of a realistic phase in like the rest of the world And Big Oily Exxon , big Energy co’s can run similar scare campaigns
But IF Labor offers the ‘Snowy’ CC grid , its an economic & politcal counter to such a job security scare campaign because Rudd can say there’s dem jobs in the super solar grid the ‘oz’ voters can see available , industries growing from it & so more jobs , and a realistic economic future for voters pockeys & job securitys , plus a ‘oz’ vision and plus a good CC heart THEN the Libs & big Oily Exxon will be shown for what they are …yesterdays mens , and yeaterdayys dirty poluting options to bequeath to our kids
William should re name this site the ‘Super Solar Grid’ ship
“I find it touching, but not reassuring, that there is so much simplistic faith in a paid advertising campaign doing the trick. Even here at this blog this is the case. We’ve just seen how the Work Choices campaign failed, despite some of the best spruiking minds in the country being behind it.”
One big difference is that Workchoices didn’t start off with a 70% “approval” rating. Advertising works best when it massages a belief or perception. Workchoices was viewed with widespread suspicion from the word go, if for no other reason than the way Howard brought it in (no pre-warning).
You don’t get to the great “unwashed” by having a political talking head telling everyone “this is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”. They will firstly not take any notice and secondly, those that do, will not believe a politician.
Rudd maybe clever but he is not a miracle worker.
With 70% believing in CC the onus is on the non believers to change that perception. Why would anyone think that would prevail with a LARGE Kernel of truth supporting CC? Surely it is safer to believe and do something than not. Even if you don’t fully believe surely it is safer to do something for your kids than not. IMHO the default position will always be the safer course for the kids sake as it was in the Workchoices debate.
Err, are we forgetting the Libs support this CC advertising campaign? How could they possibly oppose it with any credibility?
I must admit I see the CC polling different from the way some see it here. I interpreted the “low” 58% approval on Rudd’s handling of CC as suggesting that the government was not doing enough rather than too much. A recent poll by Essential research put the number of those who thought the government was not doing enough on CC at 56% (4% too much) and that view was strongest with Coalition voters.
Rudd’s biggest danger is of being seen to be all talk and no action, rather than from the Libs line. The Liberals’ position makes no sense electorally, it is for internal reasons they are pushing it.
As for the effect of the MSM on the attitude of the punters re EST, if the MSM had had their way last year Rudd wouldn’t be in office today. Over a short period they have minimal effect on a perception that has taken sometime to build up.
The world news services and even our local news outlets have, over a long period, established in Australia this 70% CC credibility, with the sceptics such as Bolt in full swing all that time.
Nelson not ruling out handing over to Costello! Crikey! What some people will do to survive!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/22/2310826.htm
Has anyone read Julie Bishop’s blog in The Age today on CC. Not getting the comments she would have liked. It sounds very similar to the line that Bolt was pushing on Insiders – i.e. the Libs will start to expound on the denier theme with the help of unnamed socalled experts.
BB – I think the Workchoices advertising is different. It was a dog of a policy and our grandkids first alerted us to the problems they were having with employers and AWAs. Being retired for a few years now my hubby and I had no idea of its vileness for them.
Grandkids have also alerted us to CC over the past 10 years. Our friends say they hear a lot about it from their grandkids too. The grandkids are not MSM readers or watchers – it all comes from the web, school and their mates. They know what fossil fuels are and know what they do. Not sure how much they want to pay for ETS but they are more aware than the oldies.
So if those ads help the old dodderers who don’t have young ones around to understand CC it will be money well spent.
Perhaps the next round of ads can show exactly how we can get a supergrid type project up and running. I agree that Rudd and Wong should be spouting that kind of project before too long.
I would have thought that with Rudd’s continued high personal approval in the face of our MSM ‘journalists’ that the general public is highly sceptical of their attempt at a ‘narrative’ (narrative individual thinking avoidance mechanism).
Despite 10 years of divide and conquer I reckon the community did come together a little last November, and are looking for someone other than themselves to blame for CC – big business fits the bill at present, along with any politician prepared to side with them.
I’m going to agree with the Shrike here.
on advertising – there’s a well known saying in my little world:
“you can’t polish a fresh turd”
Workchoices is destined to remain fresh for a long time. Even 17% interest has only recently gained an outer crust – has anyone seen it mentioned since November?
Easy. If they think (or are convinced) there’s a few percentage points in it in a few polls, they’ll think of a way to oppose the campaign and damn the charges of hypocrisy. I mean, if Turnbull can look the viewers straightin the face and say that a 5c per litre fuel reduction is absolutely pointless (which is his core belief) but that it would be good “gesture” politics,and is therefore mandatory, then he (and the rest of his party) can say anything.
If they can complain about Labor gagging debate in the Parliament, then they can complain about anything.
If they can claim that no country should act (on the basis of not wanting to be first), and bugger the consequences of not acting (i.e. global fireball), then they can claim anything. (Just on that point, I’m surprised that no interviewer has asked Nelson just which country should act first on Climate Change, and how he would convince them to do so if he reuses to let Australia practise what it preaches of other countries.)
Very easy for the Libs to find some fake debating point and to pull out of the whole CC thing, box, dice and bi-partisanship.
I think you are right there Piping Shrike @ 119.
The voter’s don’t want to be sold on an ETS, they want the government to pick up the ball and start running on real world solutions to climate change. If Ruddster came out with a plan to convert our power generation to zero emission sources and said to do so would cost x amount for each household, this would be a lot easier to sell to people than an ETS.
Oh dear:
http://news.theage.com.au/national/nelson-wont-rule-out-costello-handover-20080722-3j4q.html
I guess when you’ve got no obvious messiah, well, you just invent one, eh?
Hmm – all the recent retirees voted Nelson, not Turnbull, last time didn’t they, not to mention the WA members who were stuck in the air? Lucky the LP doesn’t have factions and everyone votes with their conscience.
Chuckle chuckle chuckle.
Ministers to lose FOI blocking power
http://news.theage.com.au/national/ministers-to-lose-foi-blocking-power-20080722-3j4c.html
good
“Looks like where there’s smoke there’s blue cod”. All that recent speculation re Costello in the MSM might have been soundly based. Nelson is preparing to run up the white flag.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/22/2310826.htm
“If Peter decides that he is going to continue his political career and serve the people of Higgins…”
So what’s he been doing for 8 months?
Thanks Dr Good, Dawesville is here …
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/wa2008/dawesville.htm
… but I do appear to have left it off my pendulum page, don’t I. Will correct that.
Please Peter, take the leadership. Let’s put this myth that he can win the next to bed. Anyone who saw “Insiders” knows he is not as popular as some would have us believe.
oops – ” win the next election”
122 The Piping Shrike – the only thing I got from that article is that Nelson would be prepared to have Costello in the shadow ministry. He’s said that before.
The old “he hasn’t ruled it out so it must be ruled in” trick.
It has been brought to our attention, that several people are making false statements about the US site, it would be appreciated if they refrain.
perhaps this is another example of rudd playing with the oppositions mind
costello wouldnt be undergoing a certain amount of ambassador envy
what with dolly and timbo out on the world stage would he?
delusions of grandeur and all that 🙂
Turning Worm @ 126:
Hear! Hear! A big project. “We’re goin’ to the Moon!” Throw in local solar power generation in selected sites – it all helps, there’s no need for one approach – and you’re on a winner, your Ruddstership.
The voters need this to get them to accept the ETS unanimously.
I’d suspect that if they tried to hand the Liberal Leadership to Costello he would find a way to side step it again. Just like he did during APEC and following the last Federal Election. He is just not up to the job and knows it better than his urgers.
On a more serious topic it looks like big changes are coming to the Federal Freedom of Information system. No doubt it will free up a lot of papers from the Howard era that were kept under lock and key too. Wonder if it will lead to a rash of resignations from Howard sycophants in the Federal Public Service.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/freedom-of-information-laws-to-be-abolished/2008/07/22/1216492417946.html?page=2
My posts today #110 the case for a Super Solar Grid on enegy needs grounds) and #116 the case for a Super solar grid on politcal and economic grounds , did NOT mention the MSN delkiberatly Just like workchoices , the CC issue bypasses whatever the MSN ever says and whatr the silk toff turn/big Oily Exxons ever try to scare us with PROVIDED our CC message/product is realisticly tangible
so forgets the MSN , the Janet , the Shanigans , we have the ruddy at only 54% satisfaction on CC ands 38% against (rfer my #98 Nielsen poll) Suggest the voters are saying we’re sold in our hearts Ruddy , voters are not mugs , they know emmissions hav to be cut , but only 54% satisfaction indicates quit the Ruddspeak They aren’t interested in how ETS works , they want to know about the mullah , a plan , & a replacement scheme for dirty coal Put up a super solar grid and a cost & its saleable But put up hot air , carbon air & an unexplanable ETS vs a Libs scare on lost jobs & higher costs , and voters see another armanoi pollie talking lovely words in far off Canberra and no reality tangable action
Ruddy you hav to walk the talk , the super solar grid , and THEN the MSN are irrelevant , as are the Libs and the big Oily Exxons
Just a small matter William I don’t think Vince (WA North West seat) was ever mayor of vincent, his dad currently is and has been for sometime.
“Wonder if it will lead to a rash of resignations from Howard sycophants in the Federal Public Service.”
Could that include those involvd with the AWB fiasco
Quite right Jasmine, now corrected.
(From Vienna)
Bull Butter!
Quote from Michelle Grattan’s report on AC Nielsen Poll
“Taken from Thursday to Saturday, after Wednesday’s green paper on carbon pollution reduction, the national poll of 1400 found 68% willing to bear extra costs to deal with climate change, 77% wanting action regardless of the world, and 54% satisfied with Mr Rudd’s handling of the issue.
Only 39% said they understood emissions trading, and most of those grasped it only fairly well. Another 39% said they understood it slightly and 21% not at all. Despite this, 67% supported it.”
From the above quote it can be taken there are 60% of people that only understand slightly or not at all what is being proposed by Rudd. Other polls say that “Rudd is not doing enough” but I do not see how this conclusion can have any depth as 60% of the people have little or no idea what is being proposed? But Grattan did say that “Support for the emissions trading scheme was strongest among those who understood it to a greater or lesser extent, and lowest among people who did not understand it at all. ” This indicates the more people knew about the policy the more they supported it. But the fact that “people wanted federal intervention on petrol prices” may indicate that there was a limit to how much extra they willing to pay as a result of the ETS.
The “low”(!) 54% approval of Rudd’s handling I took to refer to the fact that the Gov’t has not got the details of the proposal across to the people. It is the most obvious conclusion given the context of Grattan’s report. Advertising is necessary at this stage and no-one can say it does not work. The comparison with workchoices and the then Gov’t advertising of it is a poor comparison as many were alreadsy quite suspicious of the policy. A more valid comparison is the Union’s advertising campaign which worked extremely well. Good advertising at this stage will certainly assist the Gov’t in educating the people very much but it will not be enough.
The process of implementing the policy is only half way through. We have the final report to come in September by Garnaut and the White Paper is due in December. Since we have only just had the Green Paper the issue is in the public court for discussion. We are in the consulting stage of the process and the Gov’t position is not yet set in concrete. By the way I believe that the date for submissions by the public is to be returned is 10 September.
In my thinking, I would not be surprised to see Rudd presenting the White Paper in December himself, or at least have a part in the presentation. This would seem to be the appropiate time for any “big picture” speeches as the Gov’t position would then be settled and after people had been exposed to advertising, and it is at the end of the process.
I cannot believe the “naysayers” will have much impact. People have been exposed to the issue of CC for some years now and they seem to have made up their minds that they want the Gov’t to act. The fact that Grattan’s report says 77% want Aust to go ahead even if the rest of world did not indicates people want a CC policy even if they do not yet know the details. By the way I have never seen Colless write anything but anti Labor propaganda. Is he an ex Lib hack?
I believe the Process is being handled well but I prefer to reserve my judgement until it is completed. We are just not used to this sort of positive treatment by a Gov’t. Can anyone remember if Howard presented a Green Paper before he introduced his Workchoices Policy (the one he did not mention at the 2004 election)? No, we had nothing at all from Howard.
William Bowe
great WA site , don’t wish to add to your work so its just a thought This afternoon i was going to compare a few AEC Federal Electon seats results between 2004 7 2007 i wnt to the 2004 menu and by seat there is the link to the AEC site Howevr since you’ve linked it , the AEC miust have changed there 2004 links beause on 9 2004 seats i tried the AEC link came up as not avalable Now on the 2007 Federal elkecton menu there’s no links nor on the WA one menu Rather than all th work of linking by seat , was wondering if any benefit in eg WA site having a master page with AEC link of last electon/electons results Thought only
Does anyone have a link to the ETS ads? I have yet to see one. Brenda says they are “fluffy”. 🙂
Doug
#145
re your first point All the Neilson poll results on CC were listed in my #98 , the key one is 54% satisfaction with how Rudd has handled CC and 38% AGAINST Given the same Poll had Labor 2PP at 54% to 46% , basicaly Labor/Greens the faithful are happy and Lib voters are not That is a poor rsult of not communicating a tangable dirty energy replacement ‘vision’ of what will be , we are not talking about contentous IR or socialised medicine , but CC and Lib voters aren’t mugs , they can see CC too In fact the 54% is well below Rudds overall PPM of 65% Most voters will never understand the ETS anyway , but what they understand is emmissions hav to be cut , but they still want there friges & aircons in full energy use as now
re your second point , “more valid comparison is the Union’s advertising campaign which worked extremely well” Negative politcl adds world wide are proven winners against ‘positive’ politicl adds , so it was always going to work especially as W/C was a turkey likewise negative adds against CC claiming jobs will be exported & scaring voters job security will be at least as powrful than a feel good CC positive adds , without a tangable product to ‘sell’
re your 3rd point You mention ‘Green” to “White” Papers , well tthe Green paper fulfilled its function It does set out the Govt’s broad ‘vision’ in RE and emmission target terms It does set out the govt’s prefferred options re rebates etc Unlessa there are is a dramatic political or economic hole found from the submissions , White papers can become Green Papers with the margins altered , as the vision and the prefferred options ar already set out as do all green papers The RET schem details has to wait till next year & that transition data will be crucual but you ar now seeing the essential broad CC policy , subject to submissions the ‘hole’ suggested is no tangible enegy replacement scheme & reliance on mainly ETS to do so This is indeed the time to change the philosphical basis of the Green Paper , otherwise thats what the White paper essentially will be broadley If you are not keen on a super solar grid and feel ETS will evolve the new R E industries & at the necessary enegy replacement levels lost by ETS , then the Green P{aper does that , subject to th RET details transitionary (if feasible) being implemented
Are we living on a fantasy island? All these talks of Cossie making a come back to bump off Nelson is pure nonsense. Kimbo suffered greatly with the “no ticker” tag, he lost two elections. In fact, Kimbo actually has ticker, is just that he appears, especially for the media, to be no ticker.
Whereas Cossie is actually the reverse of Kimbo. He has NO ticker, but appears to be, especially for the media, the tough guy. Let see:
1. 1994 – After Hewson sacking, Cossie had a chance to be the Leader. He chickened out and handed the leadership to Dolly. The rest is history.
2. 2006 – After sniping and whingeing about Howard for years, he had the perfect chance to do a Keating and take the leadership from Howard. Again, he chickened out.
3. 2007 – After election lost, the leadership was offered to him on a plate like the finger licking 24 spices KFC chicken. Again, he chickened out.
4. 2008 – The corporate world knows he has no ticker and does not want him. As Rudd said today that Howard/Cossie never took the “tough decisions would be required for the long term and the policies of the former Howard Government had served Australia well during the good times but were downright dangerous for the bad times”.
5. 2008 – So he is writing his memoir. Has he got the ticker to tell all, to tell the truth ala Latham’s Diary. Or will it be “I love youse all” type memoir. If he does not have the juicy bits, it will not sell. So no ticker, no money.
6. 2008 – Has he got the ticker to put Nelson out of his misery and deny Turnbull out of his self-importance, whom he despises.
The punters have passed him by and judged him to be of no ticker. if Rudd doesn’t get him, Julia will. Bring him back.
But I thought Brenda was bi-partisan on the ad campaign?
If they know no shame, there’s no drainpipe too small for them to scamper up. “Hypocrisy” is just another word to masters of spin.
Incidentally, Murdoch’s bootstrapping of Costello reaches new “heights”: ABC Sydney TV tonight is running a long piece on it. Lotsa interviews, lotsa faces. Three minutes so far.
Expect Murdoch Heaven tomorrow to refer to “new reports” on the subject.