The latest weekly Essential Research survey has Labor’s lead up from 58-42 to 60-40. The survey also shows opinion is evenly divided on whether the Liberal and National parties should stay in coalition (39 per cent each way); that most believe Malcolm Turnbull doesn’t have enough control of the Liberal Party; that perceptions of job security continue to steadily improve; and that 59 per cent believe Ricky Ponting should stay on as captain. Also included are some slightly obscure questions on the recent LNG deal with China.
Couple of other things:
• Sandringham MP Murray Thompson has easily seen off the only preselection challenge against a Victorian state Liberal MP. According to Andrew Landeryou at VexNews, Thompson defeated “Baillieu faction hopeful” Margaret Fitzherbert by forty-five votes to seven.
• The Camden Advertiser reports that the seat-warming federal Liberal member for Macarthur, Pat Farmer, has his eyes on Labor-held state seats of Camden (held by Geoff Corrigan on a margin of 4.0 per cent) and Wollondilly (Phil Costa, 3.1 per cent). Locally powerful state Liberal MLC Charlie Lynn seems amused by this, suggesting Camden mayor Chris Patterson and Campbelltown councillor Jai Rowell have the respected nominations all but wrapped up, although the former says he is not sure he will run.
• The Age reports that John Brumby says US-style primaries would “enliven the democratic process”, and are ”something the party should look at”.
• The latest Reuters Poll Trend aggregate has Labor’s lead at 57.2-42.8.
• Follow the Bradfield by-election action and contribute your thoughts at the progressively updated dedicated post.
[We hacks do try and play nicely]
You don’t actually believe that do you? HA!
[Then you’re an idiot.]
That’s my view bob, and like it or not, to win elections you have to get the votes of idiots.
I agree Bob – a great progressive leader. It was a pleasure to know him, foibles and all.
[They could fall like that Bob – but the pref flows would be different because some of the votes that go from ALP-to-Lib won’t preference the Greens second in a pink fit]
According to Labor hacks like GG and Frank, Liberals will ALWAYS pref the Greens over Labor. Like in Fremantle, nobody joined or left Labor, and all the Liberals went en-masse to the Greens.
Of course, realists like us know that to be absolute rubbish. But given the chance, Liberals with a Liberal candidate will usually preference the Green candidate first. Just look at Liberal preference flows in Melbourne at the last election.
bob @1701
Yes, because I know the motives behind my posts. Generally, the statements I’ve made about the Greens have been accurate, based on evidence and given in the spirit of encouraging a minor party to recognise what it takes to become a major party. (I would much prefer our Opposition was Green not Blue).
However, every time I make a post containing anything that could be possibly twisted by a paranoid reader into a criticism of the Greens, I find myself under attack (generally from posters who have not appeared on this site previously and who vanish just as mysteriously).
Interestingly, I don’t think they’ve actually proved me wrong, although there’s been some lovely reinterpretations of my statements to attempt to do so.
[If the police don’t make comments about private threats, why did Bligh publicise them?]
Did she, or was she asked by the media?
[If the police don’t make comments about private threats, why did Bligh publicise them?]
Maybe she isn’t a police woman ?
TP 🙂
[However, every time I make a post containing anything that could be possibly twisted by a paranoid reader into a criticism of the Greens, I find myself under attack (generally from posters who have not appeared on this site previously and who vanish just as mysteriously).]
I’ve noticed the same with my posts – it’s because the usual tossed salads have to resort to getting backup like the political cowards they really are.
Frank, you’re being too predictable.
[Frank, you’re being too predictable.]
That post proves my point EXACTLY – the Mixed Salads hate being exposed.
Why shouldn’t Bligh let the public know she has had death threats? The one’s threatening her would love it if they thought they had her scared into silence
Maybe she shouldn’t have told the police either!
1710
nah, I’ts Time, he didn’t say ‘Pot Kettle Black’ or refer to legumes, so he’s doing OK.
Sorry It’s Time, don’t know why that apostrophe drifted….
Bob, why do you insist of having to fit every one of the world’s social agendas onto a simple left-right dichotomy better suited to analysing an economic structure based on parties representing Labor (left) vs capital (right).
[That post proves my point EXACTLY – the Mixed Salads hate being exposed.]
Sorry Frank, wrong on both counts. Firstly, I’d have to identify with the Greens and secondly I’d have to care about what you say.
[If the police don’t make comments about private threats, why did Bligh publicise them?]
The report I heard said Bligh ‘confirmed’ not ‘announced’. ergo, she was asked.
ruawake
That still doesn’t answer the question why she publicised it. Politicians and their families get death threats all the time. Why choose to release this one?
It’s Time
[Did she, or was she asked by the media?]
Don’t know. If she was asked, how did the media find out? And if you didn’t want to raise the profile of the nutter, you’d just say “No comment”.
Frank do you really think personal attacks adds to the flow of opinions?
fredn @1719
so why is bob allowed to make them?
[Frank do you really think personal attacks adds to the flow of opinions?]
What a hypocritical comment considering it is quite acceptable for the Tossed Salads to do so without question or penalty.
vera
Obama gets 30 death threats a day. Imagine if every one made the front page of the news. There would be no room for anything else to report.
Have any of our Green leaning bludgers come to the defence of Senator Seiwert after that right wing journo-scumbag Laurie Oakes did a truth job on her? 🙂
To be fair to bob his posts are mixed. He just called me an idiot, big deal.
The Greens will not win Melbourne in 2010
The Dockland booth is soild Liberal, East Melbourne is traditionally a Liberal booth and i am sure the Liberals will do better there than they did with Howard leading them.
The Greens do very well in certain booths around the Fitzroy area but in all fairness this is due to the complete lack of a Liberal Party vote.
Lindsay Tanner is well liked and will quite rightly campaign on his record of saving the Australian economy from recession.
1722
Diog
I’m sure Anna does, too – well, maybe not 30, but quite a few. I worked for a very lowly MP and we received a few.
I would postulate that (i) she takes this one more seriously than most; (ii) very few death threats are aimed at her family; and (iii) she wishes to highlight the tactics used in the abortion debate, to make people understand how difficult it is to legislate in this area (and yes, I do think she should have the courage to put a bill into Parliament to decriminalise abortion).
Many nutcases make threats to kill pollies. Anti abortion nutcases have a record, however, of fanaticism, and have killed doctors etc in the USA. This probably makes their threats more serious than the normal disgruntled constituent’s.
SNIP: Boring comment deleted – The Management.
Question for Antony!
How do you read the federal seat of Melbourne and in your view what do you make of the Greens chances vs Lindsay Tanner?
fredn @1724
I think you’re being fairer to bob than you are being to frank. They’re both fairly consistent in their views. bob insults ALP posters on a fairly consistent basis, and frank insults the Greens.
You, however, criticise frank for personal attacks but say a personal attack from bob is no big deal.
I agree with your first statement, that personal attacks add nothing to the debate, which is why I was criticising bob.
[Liberals will do better there than they did with Howard leading them]
I think so to, but I also think the Liberals that couldn’t stand Howard will have no trouble voting for Tanner.
Tanner will win Melbourne in 2010.
zoomster
(i) and (ii) might be true but I doubt that publicising the threat would reduce the chance of them being carried out (she has said she isn’t upping security, so she’s not too concerned).
(iii) is probably the reason.
The Secret Service said George W Bush only got 8 death threats a day. Obama’s had a 400% increase and they need more resources to keep up with the demand!
Not sure that the Liberals will do better in certain booths with Howard gone, knew a few Libs handing out HTVs in the last election who were adamant they weren’t doing it for the local candidate but because they supported John Howard.
Hard for those of us who always hated him to understand, but there were Libs who adored him.
Fredn! In 2007 there were a few inner city booths that are normall strong for the Liberal Party that actually went to the ALP
East Melbourne in the seat of Melbourne
Domain in the seat of Melburne Port,
I would be interested if Psephos could tell us if the ALP had expected to win the Domain booth or was it a shock result.
1731
Diog – nothing like a death threat to make you seem important!!
[If the police don’t make comments about private threats, why did Bligh publicise them?]
What is the relation between the two, and are you saying she can’t say anything at all unless an 3rd party body can back it up?
Are you using ‘publicise’ as a pejorative term as it appears. You statement is framed as to make a produce a negative implication, something you do a lot of now days. It is a white-anting and also one used by media – make a seemingly harmless statement but with obvious connotations.
Your statement makes no sense at all. If a polly gets threats against their children they have to shut up unless the police are willing to make some comment. I guess that is an argument you might hear a Bolt or Ackerman make when they can’t find anything else.
Zoomster
Is being called a party hack really an insult. Tossed Salad, it is very clever, but it is aimed as an insult.
Mexicanbeamer, I think Tanner will win with more than 50% of the primary vote. The swing between Labor and Liberal goes around the Greens, not through the Greens. In the Sydney seat of Balmain at the 2007 election, the Green vote was static, but the Labor vote fell and Liberal vote rose. I’d expect something similar in Melbourne at the 2010 election.
1725
That is probably true for Federal Melbourne. State Melbourne is a different kettle of fish.
Thanks Antony
TtFaB! I tend to agree with you regarding the Greens chances are greater in the state seat of Melbourne than the federal seat as we quite often see the state parliaments have a higher number of non major party MP’s.
No Green respone yet to:
[Have any of our Green leaning bludgers come to the defence of Senator Seiwert after that right wing journo-scumbag Laurie Oakes did a truth job on her? ]
So I will add why did Oakes write this in his weekend column?
In the run up to the next election the Greens will face scrutiny like never before, I hope they are up to it.
TP
I’m pointing out that the police have a reason for not publicising death threats; publicity is considered to increase the risk of people doing this type of thing and encourages them to make more threats.
That is the reason for linking the two.
1739
You do see at least some sense then. The State Government is also older.
[You statement is framed as to make a produce a negative implication, something you do a lot of now days.]
I’m sorry if everything I say isn’t positive to Labor. I’ll bash myself up about it later.
Tom! I have always said the Greens are a serious chance to win the state seat of Melbourne, i just don’t see them defeating Lindsay Tanner at this point of time, if Australia had a recession after all the spending then i might have a different view.
If my memory is correct the turning point at the last state election was when the Dockland booth came in with a large Liberal Vote than preference Ms Pike
[Bob, why do you insist of having to fit every one of the world’s social agendas onto a simple left-right dichotomy better suited to analysing an economic structure based on parties representing Labor (left) vs capital (right).]
Why do you insist on ignoring the economic and social axis?
[Hard for those of us who always hated him to understand, but there were Libs who adored him.]
And there were Lib’s who hated him. The Liberal party today is different to the Liberal party 15 years ago. It’s support base is not as wide, and you need a wide support base to win government.
Where is the extreme right vote going to go if the Lib’s go back to the center, there is no right wing greens. The Liberals are already paying people to hand out how to vote cards, whats a few more.
[No Green respone yet to:
Have any of our Green leaning bludgers come to the defence of Senator Seiwert after that right wing journo-scumbag Laurie Oakes did a truth job on her?
So I will add why did Oakes write this in his weekend column?
In the run up to the next election the Greens will face scrutiny like never before, I hope they are up to it.]
Due entirely to the fact over their response to Rudd’s ETS and that as much as our Green Bludgers may think otherwise was their Democrats moment, especially if Copenhagen agree to an ETS which is the same as both the Aujst & US Govt’s are proposing.
St Bob & co, should be afraid, VERY afraid.
[there is no right wing greens.]
well, there are, fredn, and I know a few.
BTW, I’m not insulted by being called a hack. Strangely enough, the insult of bob’s I was reacting to was his calling you an idiot!!
[there is no right wing greens.]
LOL talk about ignorance!!!
Nah Frank.
Its because the salad tossers can’t justify why the Bag Lady told huge fibs. 🙂