The latest bi-monthly state Newspoll for Victoria shows a dramatic surge for the Greens, up four points to 18 per cent, bringing down the primary vote for both Labor (down three points to 34 per cent, apparently their worst result since 1996) and the Coalition (down two to 36 per cent). After distribution of preferences, and obviously presuming Greens preferences play out the same way as last time, Labor continues to hold a 51-49 lead on the primary vote, down from 52-48 last time. John Brumby’s lead as preferred premier is down only slightly on last time, from 49-29 to 47-31.
Green vote up. So what else is new? Seems to be all we’re hearing right around Australia…
Yay!
Victorian state thread.
Greens at 18%!
But since when has Brumby been preferred Prime Minister?
Please don’t disrespect PM Brumby.
[Green vote up. So what else is new? Seems to be all we’re hearing right around Australia…]
Only if we haven’t been paying attention. Federally, the Greens were down seven in Nielsen, and five apiece in Newspoll and Essential Research (over a fortnight).
If a uniform swing of the Green primary is applied then Melbourne, Richmond and Brunswick are clearly in the Green win column and Northcote and Prahran are very close for the Greens. If some voters swing to the Libs in the proportion shown in the TPP from that of the last state election in a uniform manor and their preferences are divided between the ALP and Greens like the last state election then this would also help the Greens get over the line in Northcote.
Swing are never uniform.
4
Federally. Gillard has not just become State Leader but Federal Leader despite you claiming that Brumby is preferred Prime Minister (a certain ex-Australian`s national broadsheet`s article has him correctly as Preferred Premier against Baillieu).
The Greens result is Tasmania-esque!
Corrected.
[Only if we haven’t been paying attention. Federally, the Greens were down seven in Nielsen, and five apiece in Newspoll and Essential Research (over a fortnight).]
I was referring to over time and the trends. The federal spike from 10 to 15 to 16 to 10 was a spike but maintains the upward trend. It always seems we’re getting a poll these days showing the Greens in the high teens in any of the states or federally. What has it peaked at now for states?
Tas 23%
NSW 17%
Vic 18%
WA 16%
SA 13%
I say it again. We always seem to get a poll telling up the Green vote has gone up 🙂
Green is what you tell the nice young girl who rang when you don’t want her to think you are a heartless conservative.
I think Coalition primary vote is 40% not 36% which is just the Liberal component. Eerie similarity to the federal polls pre Julia.
Ifonly at 9
If you look back at the last 50-60 years most of the massacres of their own citizen by the government had been undertaken by
China – communist – left
Cuba – communist – left
Russia – communist – left
North Korea – Communist – left
Germany – Socialist workers party – left
If you want to term the right heartless conservative
you will also need to term the left murderous socialist, who are also currently encouraging people to come to Australia, on unseaworthy boats, so they can drown
Gotta love 7/sunrise reporting. 51/49 down from 52/48 is a slump
Same numbers as Rudd when he got the knife – obviously time to sack Brumby with a midnight coup – is there a suitable ranga to rule?
dovif @ 11,
Are you including the mass starvation in Ukraine following collectivisation under Stalin?
(This was of course pre-1950, and therefore more than ‘the last 50-60 years’.)
You cannot presume that Greens preferences will play out the same way as at the last election. The Brumby Government is seriously on the nose. I know a lot of people in Victoria who are intending to vote Greens first at the state election then preference the Liberals ahead of Labor to “send a message” to an incoming Liberal government about environmental issues.
And in the same vein didn’t Winston Churchill( Conservative) agree to send Russian prisoner’s of war back to Russia under Stalin ( Communist) knowing that they would be killed?
Sad to see Mumble move to the OZ, will you be next William?
And if ‘yes’ to my query @ 14, then why no acknowledgement of the genocide by starvation against the Irish people by the English in the 1840’s?
There was no ‘Famine’ in Ireland, merely a failure of the potato crop.
At the same time there was a bumper wheat crop – with Red Coats standing guard over the warehouses full of grain for export by absentee English landlords, to stop the starving Irish gaining access to this basic staff of life.
Yet another example of right political massacre / genocide, and far worse as a proportion of the population than all but the North Korea, of the examples cited by dovif@11.
The right wing meme of selective historical memory cannot be allowed to go unanswered.
And here are three other examples of genocide that dovif omitted to mention:
Germany – National Socialist – extreme right
Turkey – Ottoman Empire – hereditary right
Cromwell – English ‘Commonwealth’ – original loony christian right …
#11, 14, 15, 16
Wasn’t aware that John Brumby and Ted Bailleu were responsible for the Potao Famine, the Ukranian genocide, the Stalin purges or the rise of the Nazi party….
Was this poll taken before the change of PM? If so that Green vote may change dramatically given JG comes from Vic. I’m told by some here state and fed voting intentions can get a little confusing by the average voter.
I note bob is front and centre here espousing the Greens cause but was missing in action when the last set of polls arrived showing the Greens vote had almost halved.
An ALP primary of just 34%? I think its time for the ALP Right to do what its best at because obviously the situation is critical 😛
When the high Green polls came out , I would have expected a lot of those primary votes to go back to the ALP at a federal election but looking at the poll trend the Vic Green vote is pretty solid so methinks that the ALP have to be seriously worried about Melbourne, Richmond, Brunswick. At this level of support Nocrthcote, Prahran and maybe even Albert Park come into play. But beyond that, I would assume the cupboard is bare though there would also be a lot of safe liberal seats where the ALP come third.
It will be interesting to see how the ALP will play a campaign on two fronts. Also, they will need a lot of money to campaign with in the inner city seats, so the campaign spend is going to have to give somewhere.
Not a surprising poll result as the Brumby government is starting to look tired and has run out of ideas. Just look at the way they ‘me too’ after every Liberal policy release. Not saying however, that there have been too many of the latter ..
blackburnsteph,
The Liberal vote is way too high in Prahran and Albert Park for the Greens to be a threat to Labor. If these seats were lost, they’d be lost to the Liberals not the Greens.
dovif, do you actually listen to what you think, or do you find you drift in and out?
MDM
If by using the crude method of taking a standard swing as expressed in this poll ALP -9 , Greens +8, the Greens would probably just outpoll the ALP in Prahran. To get over the hurdle in Albert Park, they would need a bit more so very outside.
MDM
To win Prahran the Libs would have to improve their primary, at present in this poll, they are about where they were last time. At an election the loss of ALP primary vote might deliver a few ultra marginals – Forest Hill, Mount Waverley, Gembrook, Mitcham – but not too much more. If the Libs went up to about 44 with the ALP on 34 – the ALP would be in serious trouble as the Buroowd, Mordialloc, Bentleigh, etc the 4-6% margin would come into play.
[I note bob is front and centre here espousing the Greens cause but was missing in action when the last set of polls arrived showing the Greens vote had almost halved.]
It went from 10, to 15, to 16, to 10. It had a spike but returned to post-2007 high levels. If you want to read in to it and say the Green vote has been “halved”, then that’s your problem for being a psephological dunce 😆
This increase in the Green vote may be more in the outer suburbs than their heartlands however. A lot depends on local candidates and issues
What I find fascinating is the Greens vote. Federally, it rose under Kevin Rudd and then halved under Julia Gillard. If people mix up state and federal we can expect it to halve at the state level too. If they don’t, then there is another explanation, which means we are in uncharted territory.
The other fascinating thing about the coming campaign is the extent to which the Liberals have dumped the Kennett era. 20 years ago, the argument was that NSW and Queensland have worse PTRs than Victoria, so Victoria should get rid of teachers to get the worse ratio. Now the argument is that other states have better police to population ratios so Victoria should increase the number of police to reach that better ratio not that the other states should reduce their numbers of police to meet the worse Victorian ratio. We are back with elections as auctions. We have Ted Baillieu promising more regional money, more police, more paramedics – though not yet more teachers to restore the secondary ratio to the 10.8:1 it was before his party’s cuts in 1992-93, or even to the 10.9:1 ratio it was in 1981 under Lindsay Thompson. Perhaps that is next week’s promise.
[What I find fascinating is the Greens vote. Federally, it rose under Kevin Rudd and then halved under Julia Gillard.]
What a pile of crap. Pre-Rudd, the Greens were getting less than 8%. Now they are getting 10%+. They spiked to 15 and 16 for the last month of PM Rudd but they returned back to 10%.
http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/polling/display_poll_data.pl?mode=trend&page=continue_results&question_id=2472&url_caller=
Learn before talking crap. Thanks muchly.
bob1234,
You were here when I looked before and now you are gone; perhaps you will re-appear, so here is my answer to your typically abusive post:
I was using Nielsen figures, which showed the Greens at 15 per cent before the rise of Julia Gillard and 8 per cent after. That’s a halving.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/files/2010/06/Nielsen-Federal-table-24-25-June-2010-1.pdf
[I was using Nielsen figures, which showed the Greens at 15 per cent before the rise of Julia Gillard and 8 per cent after. That’s a halving. ]
Are you forgetting to take in to the account the spike to the Greens in the last month of PM Rudd?
Yes, glazed over, thought so. Now move along.
bob1234,
No, I was not “forgetting to take in to account the spike to the Greens in the last month of Rudd”. I was comparing one poll with the next, no more, no less: 15 per cent to 8 per cent, a halving. If I wanted to compare three polls, or four, or a whole year, I would have done so.
[I was comparing one poll with the next, no more, no less: 15 per cent to 8 per cent, a halving.]
Any psephologist would tell you how silly that is.
bob1234,
Well, perhaps you can round up a posse of psephologists to tell me how silly comparing one poll with another is. It really isn’t the point. The point is how the dramatic change in the Greens vote federally immediately after the election of Julia Gillard if repeated at the state level may say something about the confusion of state and federal issues in voters’ minds. However, if you want to have the last word, I might even let you, but this is not carte blanche for another piece of rudeness from you.
You’re trying to give the impression that the Green vote halved when Julia came. You miss the point completely. The truth is that the Green vote spiked when PM Rudd entered his final terminal month. When he left it returned to pre-Rudd-crisis levels.
Please, leave spin to the professionals. kthx.
bob1234,
You are actually reinforcing my point. The Greens vote “spiked” in Kevin Rudd’s last month (15 per cent). When he left, it returned to 8 per cent – half of 15 per cent. So, the question of substance which I raised remains: given that the Greens vote lifted federally under Kevin Rudd and halved under Julia Gillard and the Victorian Greens vote has risen substantially under John Brumby, will it too halve or drop substantially now the Ms Gillard is the PM, and if so, does that suggest that some people do not see the federal and state spheres as that distinct. Now, you don’t have to discuss the substantive question if you don’t want to.
[given that the Greens vote lifted federally under Kevin Rudd and halved under Julia Gillard]
What a rubbish conclusion. Stop the spin.
Bob
I don’t think there is a need to be abusive towards Chris in your posts above. I can see where he is coming from and there is no need to carry on the way you have. We may disagree with other bloggers, as I have with Chris many times in the past, but there is no need to be abusive.
bob1234,
I see we are going to continue to go round in circles. Pre-Julia Gillard, the Greens vote was 15 per cent. Post-Julia Gillard, the Greens vote was 8 per cent. That is a lift under Kevin Rudd and a halving under Julia Gillard. You don’t to want to discuss the federal and sate aspects of the question? Fine.
Now, you can come back with “rubbish”, “spin”, “silly”, “crap”, or even some new terms. Or you could attempt to engage with the issue I presented.
Thanks, blackburnpseph. We have disagreed, and I don’t mind bob disagreeing, but I do wonder at the number of people who think they can win an argument by abusing or labelling someone who disagrees with them. I think it is totally ineffective in an intelligent forum.
CC Agree entirely with you except that the word “sometimes” should be inserted between “a(n)” and “forum”
Please, leave spin to the professionals.
blackburnpseph,
Agreed.
bob, Yawn!
Spare us the orgasims over green votes Bob. You will win Melbourne, +/ – Richmond….and that is it in the lower house.
I’ve put Bob in moderation, for consistently being a childish douchebag over a sustained period.
47
The Greens are serious contenders in Brunswick.
and Northcote