Yesterday’s Queensland marginal seat polling from Roy Morgan turns out to have been a teaser for today’s full suite, which also targets four seats each from New South Wales and Western Australia as well as one each from Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. With samples of 200 each, the electorate-level results are of little utility, but where results from four seats are available from a particular state we can combine them to get a meaningful picture from a margin-of-error of about 3.5 per cent. The swing of 4.8 per cent to the Liberal National Party in Queensland has not been borne out elsewhere: the four New South Wales seats collectively show a 1.0 per cent swing to Labor, while Western Australia produces an essentially status quo result with a 0.2 per cent swing to the Liberals. The single-seat polling for the other three states is less useful, but for what it’s worth the result from Hindmarsh in South Australia sits well with this morning’s Advertiser poll. Taken in their entirety, the results point to no swing at all from 2007.
| ALP 2PP | |||
| 2007 | POLL | SWING | |
| Macarthur | 50.1 | 38.5 | -11.6 |
| Robertson | 50.1 | 48.5 | -1.6 |
| Eden-Monaro | 52.3 | 59 | 6.7 |
| Macquarie | 50.1 | 60.5 | 10.4 |
| NSW SEATS | 1.0 | ||
| Hasluck | 51 | 50 | -1.0 |
| Brand | 56.1 | 54.5 | -1.6 |
| Perth | 58.1 | 57 | -1.1 |
| Fremantle | 59.15 | 62 | 2.9 |
| WA SEATS | -0.2 | ||
| Flynn | 52.3 | 45 | -7.3 |
| Longman | 51.7 | 43.5 | -8.2 |
| Dawson | 52.4 | 49 | -3.4 |
| Leichhardt | 54.1 | 54 | -0.1 |
| QLD SEATS | -4.8 | ||
| Corangamite (Vic) | 50.85 | 55.5 | 4.7 |
| Hindmarsh (SA) | 55.05 | 56.5 | 1.5 |
| Bass (Tas) | 51 | 62.5 | 11.5 |
| ALL SEATS | 0.1 | ||
The abject laziness of the MSM must certainly lead to the players being increasingly vulnerable to this sort of thing. We saw during the Rudd knifing saga how many of them ran constantly with every rumour that they could get their hands on much to the amusement of observers on the side. Faux News was a classic example with tweets and e-mails flooding in for over six hours and 90% of it being confected fiction!
[THE hacker who took responsibility for a hoax email campaign that tricked Fairfax Media into reporting a fictitious takeover has emerged.
The author of the Telstra hoax claims he did it to highlight the failings in media quality control.
The emails were received by major news outlets on Sunday night, including The Australian. Sent in the names of actual journalists employed by the targeted organisations, the emails purported to report news that the US financial conglomerate Citigroup had voted to take control of Telstra.
While most outlets, including this newspaper, smelled a rat and hit the delete button, Fairfax websites picked up the story and ran with it.
The item was uploaded on to The Age’s website in Melbourne, and was also run on The Sydney Morning Herald’s website under the byline of prominent business reporter Malcolm Maiden. It remained online for 20 excruciating minutes before being taken down, the SMH later reported.]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/hackers-telstra-hoax-to-test-media-quality-control/story-e6frg6nf-1225887316155
Why do they bother.
[Is Julia Gillard’s new mining tax plan a good deal for the nation?
# Yes 30.71% (1990 votes)
# No 69.29% (4490 votes)
Total votes: 6480]
The Young Libs and staffers must be getting close to wearing all the print off their typing fingers by now. These polls are more than a joke now. And Rupert thinks people will be prepared to pay to see this sort of stuff. 😉
Now that the miners have settled with the government, Abbott is left high and dry. The government has lost some money and some face, but Abbott has lost his whole campaign – no Rudd, no GBNT. What’s he going to run on?
A couple of interesting items.
Antony Green points out that an August election would still see the govt having a record first term in office:
http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/2010/07/ruddgillard-government-serves-record-first-term.html#more
The ALP is getting shorter in the betting, although there is still $1.40 available with Luxbet.
http://www.way2bet.com.au/odds_comparison/18031/19810/42292/Australian+Federal+Election+-+2010-2011
[JULIA Gillard’s deal with mining companies on the resources tax will become a critical battleground in the looming federal poll. ]
[“The next election will be a referendum on tax,” Mr Abbott said. “The government wants a new tax, the Coalition doesn’t. It’s as simple as that.”]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/tax-done-pm-julia-gillard-turns-to-boats/story-e6frg6nf-1225887335996
Am I missing something here? I thought that Abbott was proposing a tax on all business’s with turnover greater than $5M per year to pay for his outrageous PPL scheme.
How they can sell this contradiction is sure to be interesting over the next few weeks. Tone surely has to do some sort of back-flip or else the business community must surely drag him behind the wood shed and give him a bit of enlightenment!
Hope not though, it should be fun watching him try and sell a contradiction! 😉
[Now that the miners have settled with the government, Abbott is left high and dry. The government has lost some money and some face, but Abbott has lost his whole campaign – no Rudd, no GBNT. What’s he going to run on?]
Boats! Boats!! BOATS!!!
Julia’s handling of this issue will be even more interesting than the mining solution. The mining issue always had an economic solution through negotiation. There’s no such solution with boats.
Jules has declared that is next on her to do list. gee if she keeps this pac up for Tone will be soon out of puff for he is now struggling to get his message acroos, and this is the difference between a PM in charge verses a risk manager
Genuinely paranoid Conspiracy Theorists (capital-C, capital-T) are often found believing that space aliens, the CIA, or men in black helicopters (or all three… that’s where the “Conspiracy” bit comes in) are beaming down mind-control rays – electromagnetic in nature – in order to subjugate the People Of Planet Earth so that they can be ruled by remote control.
It is often believed by said paranoid Conspiracy Theorists that the fashioning of a simple hat out of aluminium foil, with twisted corners (or similar design), and the wearing of it on top of the head, like a cap, will shield the victim from these rays, either reflecting them, absorbing them or conducting them away to ground (if a ground cable is attached to the tinfoil and is then dragged along wherever they go), similar to those rubber strips you used to see on the backs of cars to stop static shock. Hence “so-and-so is wearing his tinfoil hat again,” and similar remarks.
Actual conspiracists, the REAL bad guys, have a vested interest in concealing their own conspiracies (e.g. back room plots that their office is heavily involved in to depose, say, a sitting Prime Minister), so they often attack anyone who suspects any conspiracy on any subject as a “Conspiracy Theorist” who should be wearing a tinfoil hat (ha, ha).
In attacking all theories about any type of conspiracy as “tinfoil hat” paranoia, they seek to devalue or mock the whole idea that sometimes people – like themselves – do genuinely conspire to do quite nasty things. If anyone who wonders whether, say a poll might be rigged, or whether Lee Oswald was the only shooter can be dismissed as a “tinfoil hat Conspiracy theorist”, or a “paranoid moron” then this gives some cover to their critic’s own real conspiracy.
Of course, when the mocker’s perfidiousness is exposed, they then attack the attacker using phoney literature written by fraud as some kind of “proof” that “it’s all a Conspiracy Theory” (heh, heh). Or perhaps they might claim innocence, even though they were at the centre of things and must have known what was going on.
We have seen throughout history secret wars (e.g. Cambodia), illegal actions by trade cartels, tobacco companies, chemical companies, security organizations, coups, assassinations (political and actual) and large scale, systematic theft (as in Organized Crime) attacked as mere “Conspiracy Theories”, requiring nothing but mockery of the very idea that conspiracies are carried out to disprove them. But in the end they were all real, and the “tinfoil hat” wearers were correct.
Mocking a proposition, instead of criticising it on its merits, is a very poor form of logic, but often succeeds. The mocker has a vested interest in debunking the very idea of people conspiring to do bad things, as he (or she) is in his (or her) own conspiracy up their his (or her) neck.
We should always have a healthy scepticism about the supposed good intentions of our fellow man. Trust is a great thing, but trust with proof – evidence-based faith, if you like – is better. And when the evidence – all the evidence – comes in, and it turns out the “tinfoil hat” was a wise precaution after all, who has the egg on their face and who wears the shame of being a rat in the ranks?
[Julia’s handling of this issue will be even more interesting than the mining solution. The mining issue always had an economic solution through negotiation. There’s no such solution with boats.]
She can and should use the same argument she used with the mining tax dispute.
IE This has split the nation for two months and needs to be resolved.
EG
“This issue (boat people) has split the nation for ten years now and this needs to end. So today I’m appointing Mr/ Mrs/Ms whoever to look at this issue and come up with sensible recommendations so that once and for all we take this issue out of the political debate. Everyone will be able to have their say and eveyone’s views will be listened to and acknowledged. I encourage the opposition to join in this on a bi-partisan basis.
We are a nation of immigrants and this is what has built the strength of the country and we need to ensure that that continues, but at a pace and manner of our choosing.”
Would anyone like to speculate on how the government will try to neutralise the asylum seeker issue? I’m hoping to see some practical measure though I can’t imagine what that might be. An extension of the freeze would be very much on the cards.
[Am I missing something here? I thought that Abbott was proposing a tax on all business’s with turnover greater than $5M per year to pay for his outrageous PPL scheme.]
I may be wrong, but I think it might be $5m in taxes. Regardless of that it would be interesting to see how many companies fall into this category for Tone’s GBNT. If it’s a whole lot more than 320 wouldn’t it be a hoot!
Tom H
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QF3Cjbk1zU
Aristotle, I like that approach. Get the opposition to sit around the table with representatives from other interested groups. Put them on the spot. See if they will still dog whistle while looking eye to eye with decent respected people present.
I think it would be good to include Mal Fraser and Bob Hawke on the team together with business leaders and reps from religious groups as well.
Yes, Tom.
Nick Greiner, Jeff Kennett and John Hewson also comes to mind politically, plus any number of high profile respected immigrants, Frank Lowy etc.
It’s not simply a political solution, it is actually a policy solution and it needs to be dealt wiht on a bi-partisan basis. Abbott won’t be involved because this is all he has left, but it will leave him isolated.
I have a habit of taking every poll at face value and translating it how I can, even if it means bad news for Labor. I am pre-emptively saying tthis so nobody accuses me of being a cherry picker for what I am about to say.
This poll is rubbish. The samples are too small, the swings are too wild and there is no uniformity. The only message I could really take away from this could be that things have settled in WA but even then, with a poll like this, I’d be hesitant to.
I wonder how much money Morgan blew on this waste of time.
[Am I missing something here? I thought that Abbott was proposing a tax on all business’s with turnover greater than $5M per year to pay for his outrageous PPL scheme.
I may be wrong, but I think it might be $5m in taxes]
I actually think it is $5m in profit (before or after tax – anyone know? Does Abbott? ;-))
But what I find really interesting about this is the power of repeated mis-representation.
Rudd at just about every opportunity, and just about every QT, said “$5m in turnover”. He knew this was wrong. But he also knew it really got up Abbott’s nose. So much so that at least once, after QT, Abbott got up and had a whinge that he had been greviously mis-represented, namely on turnover versus profits.
As communicators say, keep repeating something often enough and the concept eventually takes root
I reckon you’ve found the answer Aristotle.
Aristotle
Very interesting – and she has form with Brad Orgill doing the BER “inquiry”
Tom @ 260 went:
[Would anyone like to speculate on how the government will try to neutralise the asylum seeker issue?]
That’s easy. Simply shift the focus of the offshore humanitarian stream to our own region. Over the next two years we fill our offshore quota by resettling UNHCR confirmed refugees from Indonesia and Malaysia. We should also establish a quid pro quo with the Indonesian and Malaysian governments, where we assist in relieving them of the burden of their existing refugee populations and they commit to signing and ratifying the Convention.
This really is the only long term solution to boat arrivals and has the added benefit of being palatable to both those wishing to see a more rational asylum seeker policy and the hardliners who profess a concern for those “lured to their deaths” on dangerous boats. The announcement alone would be enough to stop the boats in their tracks.
Aristotle@259, you make so much of sense but I am afraid this is not going to work. This is a vote winner for Libs and why should you throw away your aces even though it’s a racist policy.
At least 70% of Aussies hate boat at the worse and at the best are very uncomfortable about them. Every logical argument indicates the refugees and especially boat people turn out to be wonderful assets to the country but unfortunately Howard used this as a political tool. Libs were different before Howard (now he can’t understand why ICC does not want him!!!).
Libs will say this is about border security but this is only about racism and vote buying.
Aristotle@264
Good idea. But I’m not sure about the likes of Frank Lowy, Trubigoff et al. Perhaps a little elitist. Wouldn’t there be calls to include representatives of more recent arrivals, especially our Afghan and Sri Lankan communities? Hussain Rohani is the Melbourne Afghan representative for example (or was).
Such a high profile group would find it difficult to disregard the international covenants and agreements and the recommendations of our Human Rights Commissioner, which is good. It wouldn’t be the brief of such a group just to work out a better way of discriminating against boat arrivals, for mere political expediency. The government can’t be trusted on that, unfortunately.
The boat arrivals are going to continue. We cannot control that, nor can Indonesia. You only have to look at the number of islands in the Indonesian archipelago to understand that. Also the chance of the other alternative of Indonesia signing the Refugee Covenant are nil.
So, in the end it comes down to the education and political leadership of the, er, ‘less informed’ sections of the populace as to the actual nature of our immigration program, and the number of refugees we take – a number that hasn’t changed one iota in years despite the increase in boat arrivals which is a drop in the bucket overall.
Such a group as you suggest would be a good springboard for that education and leadership process – another leadership test that Rudd failed.
Alan Shore
I missed yours while composing my post. I can’t see the Indonesians signing up to the refugee treaty myself. Have they said they will under certain conditions?
The other point is, we already fill our refugee quota from UNHCR centres in various staging post countries each year as far as I know.
No terrorists, please.
[So today I’m appointing Mr/ Mrs/Ms whoever to look at this issue and come up with sensible recommendations so that once and for all we take this issue out of the political debate.]
Sounds like you are suggesting a rapid return to the Rudd strategy of shuffling every issue off to a “report”. Voters would be very suspicious that it is a return to Rudd stalling, with every “much heralded” report barely acknowledged by the govt. and then rapidly buried.
BB @ 258
[Actual conspiracists, the REAL bad guys, have a vested interest in concealing their own conspiracies (e.g. back room plots that their office is heavily involved in to depose, say, a sitting Prime Minister), so they often attack anyone who suspects any conspiracy on any subject as a “Conspiracy Theorist” who should be wearing a tinfoil hat (ha, ha).]
Beautifully put, the whole post.
Adam, you should know that you have lost me, as well. Your statements will henceforth be regarded by me as being in the same general class, in relation to sincerity and truthfulness, as those of the late, unlamented Truthy.
You may be fairly smart, but you have revealed yourself as a prevaricator and dissembler, and I, for one, just don’t believe you any more.
cheers,
Mad Dog
bakunin@274
Depends on its brief and how soon it reports and recommends. Such a group would have to come up with recommendations in terms of our international obligations and our own HRC set of Recommendations – otherwise it would be a farce. We would therefore be having on-shore processing with access to legal rights of appeal. The question is, would the government accept that and sell it to the electorate? If not, what is the point of such a group, I guess?
BB haz a homepage!
http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/
[Depends on its brief and how soon it reports and recommends.]
It was seen as a “do nothing” tactic by Rudd – “got a problem? send it to a review”. I’d be extremely surprised if Gillard resorts to something that so closely mirrors a Rudd strategy.
Aristotle
[This issue (boat people) has split the nation for ten years now and this needs to end.]
Aristotle, this can be the defining issue between a good leader & a desperate one.
The Coalition have effectively given comfort cover for racism for ten years. Peel back the cover & expose the leader for being divisive & nasty and watch the supporters desert.
This issue is Abbott’s election leverage but it is also his achilles heel.
Let’s see if Gillard can produce good & fair policy whilst effectively exposing team Abbott.
bakunin@278
As long as she does the right thing in terms of our obligations – and in terms of human decency – I’ll be happy. If she merely extends the discrimination against boat arrivals and also continues the sub-discrimination against particular nationalities, then she’ll be just another Rudd on the issue – beholden to those pesky focus groups and issue polls.
That is, following, not leading. However, I shall reserve judgement until she moves on it. Can’t be fairer than that. 😆
I don’t know why Murdoch doesn’t just publish the numbers of Asylum Seekers and Illegal imergrants in his paper each month…then all his readers can see we the largest numbers come from the USA & the UK (bout 17,000 a year) and the smallest number come from the countries where we have troops
To address the asylum seeker issue they need to neutralise three arguments:
1.queue jumper issue
2.racism
3.economic free loaders or stealing jobs from other Aust.
As far as I can see 1 & 2 are in the hands of the govt whilst 2 is a long term issue.
Could the boat people issue be turned around into a reverse wedge from an economic perspective. ie if you attempt to come into the country via boat you will be put into detention, however whilst in detention you will be required to work or earn a trade skill and then if you are granted asylum you will be required to work in mining related areas where there are the large skills shortages. The areas of the population which seem to be concerned by boat people are western sydney etc which seem to fear these people are coming to take their jobs plus a racist overtone. Given it will be hard to overcome the racist overtone except through long term education if you address the economic side surely it goes some way to neutralising their concerns. Addressing the “queue jumper” issue is somewhat tricky however.
JV, Indonesia has committed to signing the Convention and the UNHCR is working with Indonesian authorities to make that happen. Malaysia has made no such commitment.
Our participation in the offshore resettlement program is entirely voluntary and we can resettle as many refugees as we like from whatever country we like. There really is nothing stopping us shifting the focus of our resettlement program to our own region.
[I don’t know why Murdoch doesn’t just publish the numbers of Asylum Seekers and Illegal imergrants in his paper each month…then all his readers can see we the largest numbers come from the USA & the UK (bout 17,000 a year) and the smallest number come from the countries where we have troops]
Because this wouldn’t sell papers. Papers play up to already held perceptions because if you try and oppose them people will just get enraged and stop buying.
the spectator@282
That is beyond a breach of human rights. It is a long-term prison camp with forced labour. Look back in 20th C history for some outstanding examples.
Refugees are traumatised people who have abandoned everything of their previous lives and are fleeing a real fear of death. SO we do that to them?
And there is no such thing as a queue jumper. Therefore it should be easy for the government to explain if it ever feels so inclined.
[And there is no such thing as a queue jumper. Therefore it should be easy for the government to explain if it ever feels so inclined.]
If it were so easy the Greens would be receiving a primary vote in the 40s rather than the 10-20%.
Alan Shore@283
I hope something comes of it then, but an Indonesian ‘commitment’ means something rather more ethereal than we are used to, I think. 😆
the spectator
You talk to anyone who is angry about the boat refugees. Nearly all have come to the conclusion that we should sink them, blow them out of the water etc..
So the concern is definately not about smugglers. This is purely about racism. If there were boat loads of poms, yanks etc… the whole nation would be at the beach to welcome them. There would be no discussions of queue jumpers, economic refugees.
Gillard has to dessimate Abbott’s legitimising of racism which is hidden under the cover of awful people smugglers.
Alan Shore
Maybe we should loan Bambang a pen? 😆
Dee@288
Or white Zimbabweans.
That’s exactly what Gillard must do. Not easy, but necessary. She can hopefully desiccate and decimate Abbott in the process. But we’ll need 10 Abbotts first, for the latter to be possible.
*gone afloat*
[Gillard has to dessimate Abbott’s legitimising of racism which is hidden under the cover of awful people smugglers]
just say that they are 1 percent of arrivals in this country which is something i read was it here or else where.
O i think Rosa may have posted that but am sure it would be correct
Double page spread in the mercury this morning with news limted great picture i notice Julia is reading a very interesting book which i have just put on hold at my library
race of a life time
i suppose its a good move so lets see what the murcdoch press write any way.
[beholden to those pesky focus groups and issue polls.]
That is, to the stated views of the majority of the Australian people. We all love polls, except when they find that the majority of people hold views we disagree with. Then they become “pesky” and we look for ways to ignore them. But political parties ignore the will of the people at their peril. The reason this issue is so difficult for Labor is that it pits the two parts of its base against each other – the affluent left-wing middle-class against the socially-conservative working-class. The former are virtually unanimous is being “immigration liberals,” but the Australian working class has always been hostile to immigration, and particularly to illegal immigration. On top of that is the fear of Muslim immigrants, a fear not wholly unjustified by events (Jihad Jack, Benbrika etc). I think Gillard really has no choice but to stick with the present policy, and hope that other issues outweigh it in the public mind. If she moves to the “left” she gives Abbott an even bigger issue to run with, and puts at risk seats in NSW, Qld and WA. If she moves to the “right” she effectively admits that Labor was wrong to change Howard’s policy, plus she bleeds more votes to the Greens.
“”That is beyond a breach of human rights. It is a long-term prison camp with forced labour. Look back in 20th C history for some outstanding examples.
Refugees are traumatised people who have abandoned everything of their previous lives and are fleeing a real fear of death. SO we do that to them?
And there is no such thing as a queue jumper. Therefore it should be easy for the government to explain if it ever feels so inclined.””
If agree with those points however unfortunately the dog whistle side of the argument through red arrows invading Aust seems to win the day thanks to Howard first and now Abbott. The first part of the strategy must be to address the economic concerns via some mechanism the second part is a long term education strategy to move the country on from the issue via education, a bi partisan panel etc. In the short term education will be tough to win the day as we are talking about long held racist thoughts therefore the economic argument must be addressed. Another angle might be regional pact on asylum seekers ie an agreement between Aust, Indonesia, NZ and other Asian countries that if you come into this region and you are granted asylum it will not necessarily be in the country you enter but in one of the countries in the region.
[especially our Afghan and Sri Lankan communities? Hussain Rohani is the Melbourne Afghan representative for example (or was).]
i beleive there is an afghan cricket playing with NSW that may soon be in the
australian team i think i may have read that in mike carltons article last week.
I have been thinking this for a long time some of these red necks my soon be cheering a refugee on the cricket field some one should point that out to them
Oh no!
Tinfoil hats actually amplify the mind control signals!
No wonder my head feels like its buring all the time. And I thought it was the grog…
So now of course we have the usual string of posts arguing that Labor should adopt the inner-city elite view of immigration and tell the working class they are racists and why don’t they just get over it. Well, comrades, it isn’t quite that simple, because without working class votes you will have the Libs in power for ever. The working class showed in 2001 what they think about this issue and they haven’t changed their minds, despite a decade of lectures from the good and the great. So Labor will not be adopting this suggestion, but thanks anyway. Try again when you have a better idea.
There was a great story this week here about a young man from Somali, who is an engineer and working with the hydro electrical company he plans soon to take some time back in his own country building a school.
He has worked for some time now with the hydro and only in his thirties he said he had been in a refugee camp since he was three has only been here 10 years what an achievement.
Schooling is done there in the hot sun under a tree there where pictures shown of a present day group under said tree
Just heard Abbott on the radio (first item, in fact first three words on ABC radio news, of course… “Tony Abbott says…”) that he isn’t claiming the governemnt has cooked the books to come up with a $7.5 billion windfall out of the new RSPT, but that their figures are “unbelieveable” anyway.
The ABC runs this without comment from the govt., natch. But I thought the reason was that the 40% tax loss “partnership” part of the deal had been dropped to compensate.
Poor Tony is going to have a hard time running an anti-tax campaign with the principal companies pretty-well signed up.