Roy Morgan hasn’t let itself be put off by the flak it copped with last week’s small-sample poll results from the four inner-city Labor-versus-Greens contests, repeating the exercise with only a slightly larger sample of 327 respondents. Taken together they show Labor leading the Greens 53-47, which is seven points better for Labor than last week’s poll. All told this points to a 3 per cent swing to the Greens compared with 2006, which if uniform would just tip Labor out in Melbourne, but leave them safe in Richmond, Brunswick and Northcote. This is indeed borne out by the seat-by-seat breakdowns, which have it at 50-50 in Melbourne, 57-43 in Richmond, 52-48 in Brunswick and 52.5-47.5 in Northcote. The margin of error on the combined result is approaching 5.5 per cent.
UPDATE: Now Morgan offers a spiffy video display of “worm”-style Reactor responses to various election ads. It finds Coalition voters were far more positive about their own side’s advertising than were Labor’s, but that Labor appeared to offer both the most (attacking Liberal spending plans) and least (the famous Baillieu Knight Frank ad) effective attack ads. Labor also did pretty well among independents and Greens with a humanised John Brumby’s fireside chat on the economy. Labor’s “meerkat” and the Liberals’ “are we there yet” attack ads failed to impress Greens and independents in roughly equal measure, but the Liberals did better with their “mouldy fruit” ad. The Greens ad, once it began laying on the hard sell, found Labor voters responding barely less positively than to ads from their own side, while Coalition and independent voters headed south.
GG,
I’m not talking about the Fevola’s off the field stupidity. It was your claim that “Fevola is the best kick for goal since Peter Mckenna” that put you beyond any claims to reason!
As for gay marriage, just give up. Two thirds of the population, together with the majority of the Labor Party and even half of the Libs either are in favour of it or couldn’t give a damn. No political party is going to forego the 10% or so of the vote that comes from those directly affected by the current Howard law for long. Most Australians simply don’t have much time for the Joe de Bruyns of this world.
Rod – never thought I’d be defending Brendan Fevola – but – if I had to have someone kicking from 50 metres straight in front to win a flag (the pain the pain) I would have got him, despite his weird kicking style, and ignoring everything else!
GG,
LOL. re Fev, please supply the names of any betters. Happy for you to learn about rational debates.
Re homosexual marriage. There has been no real discussion. Just lots of assertion from PC pressure groups and hysterical rantings. I’m not impressed, cowed or particularly bothered atm.
The definition of marriage is a relationship between man and woman. That’s the law. Upholding the law probably puts me in the hard centre don’t you think?
This week’s edition of the local newspaper had three large “Put Labor last” ads (Taxed Out, Right to Life Australia, and Nightclub Owners Forum), one anti-Liberal ad (Melbourne Water Catchment Network) and no anti-Greens ads.
Also included was an insert endorsed by Environment Victoria, The Wilderness Society, Friends of the Earth, Australian Conservation Foundation and Victorian National Parks Association about securing water for Victoria’s new parks (Rescue our rivers campaign).
[if I had to have someone kicking from 50 metres straight in front to win a flag]
Nah, Rocket. He’d think about it, scrag the kick , scratch his balls, and start complaining that his shoulder was out of wack or some such.
Give me Lockett, Lloyd, or Simon Madden any day in such a situation.
[That’s the law. ]
Johnny Howard made many laws, GG. This was one of them. Workchoices was another. The fact that they were the law didn’t make ’em good ones.
Of current players I’d also take a fit Jonathan Brown, but few other players can reliably kick over 50.
Even Lockett’s best work for us was inside 50 (maybe on account of him not moving that far!!)
Rod,
Check out the vid.
The goal agaisnst Adelaide is in the best five of all time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev70uBbtNvg
rod,
Re Homosexual Unions.
March until you are foot sore.
Prove your case comrade. I know I’m in the middle on this one.
Pegasus
Did you also notice in the Whitehorse Leader the letter from the Greens candidate for Box Hill seemingly to endorse the Liberals transport policy … on the basis that it was originally the Greens. Not often an endorsement for the Libs from the Greens!!
[Prove your case comrade. I know I’m in the middle on this one.]
Not according to the polls. Not even close.
Fevola manages about 62% conversion all up – pretty average for a full forward and way below “elite” level. He was vastly over-rated at Johnny Elliot’s club and has gone further down hill since heading north.
From outside 50 Scotty Lucas would have eaten him alive. Yes Brown gets up to closer to 64% and would be a better bet. Still well short of the “elite” kickers though.
Diogs,
Depends how you define the question.
What were the poll rankings on the ETS. About 57%. and the Republic?
I thought you believed poll driven policy was the bain of good Government.
[The goal agaisnst Adelaide is in the best five of all time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev70uBbtNvg%5D
Oh, come on! Even the Essendon fullback can do better than that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jme9aV6A-eA
GG
It’s “bane” not “bain”.
Of course, you are right that the actual model could have less than 50% support (like the ETS or Republic) but whenever and however the question has been put, the average answer has been more pro-same sex marriage than your views. Which you are perfectly entitled to.
To be honest, I’m not too fussed about it but I know other people are and I think they are in the right. I certainly wouldn’t go to the wall over it, whereas I would over climate change or health.
Diogs,
Sorry, the NSW Right view is that polling is the “brain” of good policy.
What if they asked about Simpson and his donkey type relationships or Lassie coming in a home?
How long before we have pot plant friendships demanding equal consideration under the law.
GG
Those examples might be a little facetious but I think polygamists would have a similar argument that their relationships shouldn’t be illegal. Evidently Mormons haven’t been polygamous for ages (according to the Annotated Guide to Sherlock Holmes).
Diogs,
My point is that throwing around polling stats on social issues before the bunsen burner of alternate opinion kicks in is a little optimistic.
[What if they asked about Simpson and his donkey type relationships or Lassie coming in a home?]
Cheap stuff, GG. All too reminiscent of the days when some automatically linked homosexuality to pedophilia and the like.
The alternative opinion has been well and truly voiced. I can’t see a decent scare campaign being run on the issue. It’s been around for too long and too many other countries have done it without it being the end of moral civilisation for a moral panic to occur.
Still, Abbott is very resourceful.
Diog 117
I think that was more or less one of the conditions for Utah to get statehood, but there are breakaway sects I think in Nevada that are still polygamous, as were Muslims and Jews in the past.
Plenty of polygamous traditional Indigenous marriages in the NT still when I was working there.
RR
That’s exactly what the Annotated Sherlock Holmes book said!!
[My point is that throwing around polling stats on social issues before the bunsen burner of alternate opinion kicks in is a little optimistic.]
In that case, what leads you to believe you are “in the middle”?
Rod,
Prove your case for change. My point is that it is just another little PC social experiment distraction that is being widely propagated without broad community support.
Indifference is not support.
Rod,
It’s the vibe.
Diogs,
It appears the Oz hubristic exultations re the AFP publication defence are not all what they seem. The report did not actually exonerate them. More coming.
The euthenasia Bill in the S A Parliment has been defeated
For those around the country the Victorian election will be on ABC News 24 from 6pm EST Saturday.
No Green blogger has defended there Party’s refusal to allow Treasury to check there costings , so when a Green like rod Hagen defends Greens unindependantly Transport ‘polisy” he has no credability
No Greens blogger has defended Greens stance of incr th chanses of a liberal Govt by trying to do pref deels with Liberals to win Labor seats and not give Labor 2nd prefs in 12 marginal Labor seats
that this shows Greens do not care if there is a Lib Govt as long as they steel Labor seats proves there is not a “left” Party at all , but a collection of idealistic extremists worrying about 5th level issues with econamics or basic budgetted costings a no zone territory
both sets of silent hypocracy by th new age Hanonites Greens is as blatant as th Liberals and there claims to improve education and police numbers when last in govt they cut both
That th Greens in Melb run a lying shaby campiagn against Pike on gay mariage , depsite her public suport for it and despite her having proudly a gay son reeks of vile
That this whole issue is govened by a Federal Act makes Greens making it a State issue quite deceptive to Voters
any 4th term State govt must be at risk , tho on performanse Brumby’s should not be Balleau will gain Seats mainly in Melb’s s/east and espec there because of its time & swingers on trains & law , and by disassociating th Liberals from th extremist Greens who is a turn off to middle australia voters But cannt see Libs winning 12 Seats
[Greensborough Growler
Posted Wednesday, November 24, 2010 at 11:31 pm | Permalink
Rod,
It’s the vibe.]
GG absolutely defends his right to be wrong.
I wonder is “Anecdotal evidence” less or more rounded in reality than “it’s the vibe”?
[I told a pollster in 1994 that the most important thing the Liberals should do was get rid of Downer. That worked out really well for my side, didn’t it? 🙂 Thought about that smart comment for about 12 years!]
So you’re the one responsible for the lost decade then rocket.
castle 132
Yes. It used to haunt me!
Be careful what you wish for!
From The Age: http://www.theage.com.au/national/fake-patients-created-by-hospitals-in-funding-rort-20101124-187dz.html
“Fake patients created by hospitals in funding rort
Julia Medew
November 25, 2010
VICTORIAN hospitals have been rorting a multimillion-dollar program that pays them to treat patients in their homes, a senior doctor says.
The director of the Royal Melbourne Hospital’s ”Hospital in the Home” program, Michael Montalto, said a review of the system-wide scheme published by the Department of Health this year indicated hospitals were abusing the program to generate money.
He said the review did not ”point the finger” at guilty parties – but insiders knew hospitals were admitting patients to the program when they were in fact going home without needing any further care….
…The revelations will embarrass the Brumby government in the lead-up to Saturday’s election. ”
Why on earth would they embarrass the Government? For introtuducing a Hospital in the Home program?
drowner 134
Notice he made sure to add this. It’s obviously everyone else’s problem!
[Dr Montalto said despite the rorts, the program had been a terrific success – and that his comments on rorting did not apply to the Royal Melbourne Hospital, which had administered the program well.]
[No Green blogger has defended there Party’s refusal to allow Treasury to check there costings ]
Haven’t seen Treasury costings from any of the parties so far, Ron. The election is tomorrow. Getting a bit close. Seems to me that if political parties were serious about this stuff they would all join together to pass legislation requiring that such things were provided either when they were announced, or at least a week before election day. As it stands whoever is in government uses the notion to bash the others over the head about the matter (while often not really complying itself until, at best, the very last minute, while the others blithely ignore the process entirely.
[No Greens blogger has defended Greens stance of incr th chanses of a liberal Govt by trying to do pref deels with Liberals to win Labor seats and not give Labor 2nd prefs in 12 marginal Labor seats]
Not being a Green blogger, I can’t really help you there, Ron, but as I understand it Labor knocked back a Greens offer for prefs in the 15 most marginal seats in exchange for Labor prefs and decided to favor the Country Alliance in some of them. Even then they still gave Labor their prefs in 13 of the 15 most marginal seats. If Labor lose the genuine marginals that The Greens have preferenced them in anyway, then they are stuffed regardless, without the second “band” of seats requiring over 6% that you mention coming into play.
Personally I’d be happier if they had simply preferenced Labor in all seats, but we all know Green prefs cards don’t have much effect. Around 80% of their prefs go to Labor anyway, even when no preference is expressed on the cards, though the frenzied “greens bashing” we have seen from some Labor supporters and apparatchiks may well push it down a bit this time. The implications of this, as I have been trying get people here to consider in Labor’s own interest, may have a far more negative effect on Labor’s 2PP in some suburban and regional marginals than whatever appears on Green HTV cards.
As far as the inner city seats go, I personally hope Richard Wynne gets up in Richmond. I think he is developing into a very good Minister of Aboriginal Affairs in Victoria (and these are as rare as hen’s teeth at both State and Federal levels) and it would be very sad to see him go. I’m personally surprised that there weren’t moves to find Pike and Wynne safer seats before the election. The writing was on the wall with respect to the inner city seats after the last election and the chances are that they will move ever further towards the Greens unless Labor itself does more to accommodate the views of people who live in such areas. Unless they do, Labor are always going to struggle in electorates with a large proportion of young, well educated , voters. These seats simply don’t have the same demographic than they did when they were “traditional Labor heartland”, and this has been becoming more and more obvious for a long time now.
blackburnpseph @ 110,
Yes, I did notice. He has managed to get a couple of letters to the editor published.
An update on Labor costings.
Some, but not all of the Labor costing requests have now been responded to by Treasury and are available on the Treasury website at http://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/CA25713E0002EF43/pages/election-2010
To be fair to Treasury, who haven’t completed the job by the due time of 5.30PM yesterday, the “deadline” for submission of costings as indicated in their own guidelines was November 18th last week, and the majority of the Labor policies were not submitted until this week, some as late as yesterday.
When looking at the various documents on the treasury website it is important to distinguish between three categories of document. Firstly there are the submissions from the party itself, then, prior to the costing being undertaken, a notice of “receipt” appears. Once a costing has been completed then this is replaced with a “costings release”
The early policies have now generally been costed. Many of the later ones, especially those which were only put in on Monday and Tuesday, have not.
One Greens policy relating to poker machine limits, was submitted on November 8th, but has not yet been costed. No other Greens policies have been submitted.
Two minor Australian Sex Party submissions, both submitted late, one on the 19th November and one yesterday, have not yet been costed.
No policies have been submitted by the Coalition.
Getting ahead of myself, aren’t I! It is Thursday not Friday! What was I saying elsewhere about Bronwyn Bishop not knowing what day of the week it was!
Treasury may well still be able to get the policies submitted late by Labor done in time for the deadline.
RR
[Dr Montalto said despite the rorts, the program had been a terrific success – and that his comments on rorting did not apply to the Royal Melbourne Hospital, which had administered the program well.]
The old classic “Mistakes were made, but not by me.”
All these programs are rorted within an inch of their lives. The health departments say they will offer x dollars to the hospital for each patient who is discharged early. The incentive to maximise the extra funding is huge as it gets you hospital more funding, makes you look good and get a promotion and no-one really suffers. It certainly isn’t illegal.
It’s a game.
I certainly hope one of our Greens posters is not behind this juicy little scandal.
http://www.vexnews.com/news/11723/false-document-charges-greens-candidate-millionaire-property-developer-brian-walters-caught-in-blatant-campaign-fraud/
[
I certainly hope one of our Greens posters is not behind this juicy little scandal
]
And here I was thinking the Greens were supposed to be putting end to “politics as usual”
Rod Hagen
Posted Thursday, November 25, 2010 at 8:19 am | Permalink
1/ ‘No Green blogger has defended there Party’s refusal to allow Treasury to check there costings ‘
“Haven’t seen Treasury costings from any of the parties so far, Ron.”
Anyone reading my factual Statement in 1/ knows th Greens Vic MLC (Barber) publicly refused Treasury costings because he did not trust Treasury using th Tony Abbott excuse , and so knows your reply was spam simply avoiding what I said , quite slippery
2/
‘No Greens blogger has defended Greens stance of incr th chanses of a liberal Govt by trying to do pref deels with Liberals to win Labor seats and not give Labor 2nd prefs in 12 marginal Labor seats/
“.. but as I understand it Labor knocked back a Greens offer for prefs in the 15 most marginal seats in exchange for Labor prefs and decided to favor the Country Alliance in some of them.”
Anyone reading my factual Statement in 2/ knows your reply is a lie by ommission , again quite slippery of you
Facts ar Labor offered Greens 2nd prefs in both Chambers in echange for 2nd prefs in just Labors most marginol Lower house seats (WHICH MAXed th chances of preventing a Liberal Govt) ,
which th Greens then sleezilly refused because th Greens wanted Liberal prefs in Labor’s 4 inner city Seats to pinch them and so Greens Party shabilly to get those Lib prefs did not wish to pss off th Liberals by 2nd pref Labor in all of Labor’s marginol Seats & consequently only offered Labor orefs in just 1/2 of those marginol ALP Seats
such a Greens blatant act of betrayal to positively incr th chanses of a Liberla Govt is simply for selfish motives
Whilst Greens Party can hav th decision to do so but Greens can NOT avoid a forever stain of positive & significantly improving Liberal Party’s politcal opportiunity to form a Lib Govt All your naunced pretty words defending your Greens Party does not change these facts (youse also did so , twice , in causing th downfall of Q’ld Labor Goss govt to elect a Liberal Q’ld govt)
apparently, msm reporting that Collingwood players are sending out messages on twitter for fans to vote for Labor.
vic
Where is that being reported?
[apparently, msm reporting that Collingwood players are sending out messages on twitter for fans to vote for Labor.]
Hope they are just sending them to Collingwood supporters or it could have a nasty reverse effect!
GG@125
The anti-gay marriage people didn’t prove their case in 2004. They just decided to change the law by having a vote in Parliament while they had the numbers.
You keep asking Rod to prove the case … well, the gays were trying to prove their case in the High Court in 2004 that under centuries years of Common Law that when you marry overseas in a Commonwealth country your marriage is recognised in other Commonwealth countries. They were married legally in Canada, and like thousands of people before them thought their marriage was legal in Australia, which was the Common Law at the time.
Of course, the 2004 amendments to the marriage act were a disgraceful overthrowing of several hundred years of Common Law, but I notice conservatives largely applauded the move, rather than defending the status quo…
[No Green blogger has defended there Party’s refusal to allow Treasury to check there costings , so when a Green like rod Hagen defends Greens unindependantly Transport ‘polisy” he has no credability]
I will – happily. “Submiting costings” is a pathetic 3-card trick invented by Costello to trip up the ALP. you’ll note the LNP now effecetively concedes that by refusing to cooperate with it in opposition. Just as Swan did by submitting them too late. Its a con, a load of ruibbish, it has zero value to public policy or economic management.
The reason we have Treasuries is to advise governments on what is affordable and what isnt . They can do that anytime- and if a political party has over-promsied and has to scale back once in power, well, let that be on their heads.
Here endeth the defence. :p
blackburnpseph@20
Just a bit underwhelmed by the campaign in good old macedon. Just the occasional junk mail but not alot compared to the federal poll. No sign at all of the Liberal candidate in Woodend. Joanne Duncan was at the local supermarket a couple of weeks back so thats all good.
Encounted a/the green on Woodend station on Monday though, was handed a business card with 5 reasons to vote green on it. Of course my immediate reply was is that it only 5?
These were generic green reasons as well, sustainable bull twang this, renewable that, free tofu for sociology students…
Predicted outcome for Macedon? Who knows to be honest all sorts of micro issues going on – big demographic changes since 06, more development in the south, more mortgages, new families and the promied electric trains to sunbury.
Up our way, overcrowded commuter trains, closing half a lane on Black forest drive and continued angst about planning and development – though the dissatisfaction is mainly directed at local Government…
One things that sets us apart is we have missed out on the big regional Bendigo/ballarat style promises of AFL games, new schools as we are either too small or too safe..
Liberals promised to fix the black forest drive (a real no brainer) and to take Sunbury out of Hume council (into macedon ranges), labour promises for us…dont know exactly more of the same I guess.
Pushed for a prediction I would guess – reasonable swing to the Liberals not enough to lose but enough to be uncomfortable. Demographics would help with this as Gisborne is more Tory than us and Sunbury is split 50-50 with the aspirationals and rusted ons. Woodend and further north? Dunno, we have been pretty Labor for fed/state but with new developments propsed, services squeezed and the crowded transport there might be a shift.
Overall prediction, TPP 51-49 Loss of Melb and Bruswick to GRN, with ALP on 46 Seats
lefty e
Caveat emptor, eh.
There is nothing more emptory than Greens promises.