GhostWhoVotes brings us the latest quarterly state Newspoll from Queensland, and it finds Anna Bligh’s government continuing to give Kristina Keneally’s a run for its money in the unpopularity stakes. From an already dismal starting point, Labor’s primary vote has slumped a further three points to a new low of 26 per cent, with the Liberal National Party up one to 45 per cent, the Greens down one to 13 per cent and others up three to 16 per cent. For what it’s worth under optional preferential voting, the LNP’s two-party preferred lead has opened from 57-43 to 59-41. Anna Bligh’s personal ratings, which already looked terminal to begin with, have also worsened: her approval is down two points to 24 per cent and her disapproval up two to 67 per cent. John-Paul Langbroek gets more good news from his personal ratings: he is now on 38 per cent for both approval and disapproval, up six and down six respectively, and his lead as preferred premier has widened from 42-34 to 41-31.
I can see the headlines now:
“Bounty rich for Bligh mutiny”
My post on NSW thread mentioned Q’ld as same situation so repost here same reason
Ron
Posted Saturday, January 8, 2011 at 12:22 am | Permalink
Greensborough Growler
Posted Thursday, January 6, 2011 at 12:30 am | Permalink
Mod Lib,
These things always go the same way.
I write one line. The evil Lib writes copious quantities of verbiage to try and rationalise a frenzied hope that this time things will be different. Ho hum.
“I reckon Labor putting the Greens last will just about get us over the line.”
“Agee with principal of th last line GG ,
Balleau tapped into reality that Greens is toxic to middle australien voters , and if one looks at 39/61 labor in q’ld there’s a similar threshold to NSW Greens dont go ovr , beyond which Liberols in both States get them voters Stats is there
At min putting last will save furniture & leave Labor NSW making a stand on somthing ‘
(seeing Bligh’s privatization & petrol blunders+ Fed Mining tax has bitten vote so hard
Re Qland poll
The latest poll shows Labor’s primary vote at 26%…very like the NSW polls,and the combined Greens and Indies at 29%,,again very like NSW’s polls..and that vote makes up a total of Primary votes of 55%,,very like NSW total again.
It seems many Labor voters will vote for Green of Indies…but not for the Libs…
Interesting view of the voters minds !.
wow how surprising Labor is not flavour of the month…and on performance last week the PM is not performing well at all…her downgrading the govts grants to WA flood victims, as per Queensland was bloody stupid,her apology made it worse.
[DavidPosted Saturday, January 8, 2011 at 1:32 am | Permalinkwow how surprising Labor is not flavour of the month…and on performance last week the PM is not performing well at all…her downgrading the govts grants to WA flood victims, as per Queensland was bloody stupid,her apology made it worse.
]
and when was the poll taken again ??
October to December – WAY before any floods or announcements.
But don’t let that small detail disturb your anti-Gillard spray.
I still find it curious why Bligh’s polls are so bad? The Qld government has not done nearly as badly in terms of delivery as NSW Labor. Was the Health payroll fiasco a major vote loser? I imagine a lot of staff in the Health Dept would normally vote Labor.
When Goss lost in the 1995 election it was said that frustrated public servants were one of the largest groups that had voted against him (and Rudd).
It seems to me the situation is different to New South wales in that the NSW government polls so abysmally low because they are perceived to be, and probably rightly so, incompetent and possibly corrupt to some extent.
In Queensland it seems to stem from the very sour taste left after the last election where Labor pretty much did a 180 degree flip and did everything they said they were not going to do and everything they accused the LNP of wanting to do. They have governed reasonably competently, at least as competently as any other average administration.
I’m still hesitant to say Queensland Labor is doomed however, though Bligh might be. Best thing to do might be for her to gracefully step aside if her numbers refuse to improve, and elect a new leader who can change the direction of the party to rebuild support with it’s base. A spill would make things worse however.
David@4
David….it really would help informed debate if you could occasionally get your facts right…
“Two topics in particular were on people’s minds. People expressed concern that in WA the clean up help is capped at $15,000 while in Queensland it’s up to $25,000, she says.
“I can explain why that difference is there really easily. We respond to state government requests.”
In Queensland, the Prime Minister explains, Premier Bligh asked for up to $25,000 while Mr Barnett asked for $15,000.”
Clearly….if anyone is to blame for the discrepancy, it’s Mr Barnett……..
Ps: She didn’t apologise to anyone…….she has nothing to apologise for…..
Sorry…..forgot link: http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/01/07/3108676.htm
Has anything more come of the idea of re-introducing compulsory preferences?
When you look back in a few years, you will find that both the Queensland and NSW governments – and indeed those of Victoria and SA – were doing a pretty good job when they were unceremoniously thrown out by voters with the concentration span of an Australian batsman.
Anna Bligh has handled the response to the flood crisis well, at least that’s my impression from New South Wales.
TT
That’s what everyone said about WA. They seem pretty happy with their choice over there.
evan
It’s the long-term rebuild that will be the challenge. Lots of opportunities to do a good or bad job either way.
[When you look back in a few years, you will find that both the Queensland and NSW governments … were doing a pretty good job when they were unceremoniously thrown out by voters with the concentration span of an Australian batsman.]
TT:
16 years not a long enough concentration span? I would be interested (no, really I would just out of amazement at this comment) what you consider the great achievements to warrant the “pretty good job” description please?
…that last comment was about NSW of course!
[The latest poll shows Labor’s primary vote at 26%…very like the NSW polls,and the combined Greens and Indies at 29%,,again very like NSW’s polls..and that vote makes up a total of Primary votes of 55%,,very like NSW total again.
It seems many Labor voters will vote for Green of Indies…but not for the Libs…]
I think there is a natural resistance for Labor voters to voting Liberal but it is often overcome by polling day. There may also be in-theory enthusiasm for the Greens that fades when they are examined more closely and targeted by other parties (or when they run a dud campaign as often happens). Victoria was a good example – at one point polls were showing a big swing from Labor going mainly to the Greens, but in the end it went mainly to the Coalition. If there are huge swings against Labor in Qld and NSW as expected, they should go mainly to the Coalition – whatever polling now suggests otherwise.
Nothing much has changed with the accession of the Barnett govt in WA. I believe it will be something similar in Victoria and NSW. Basically, all govts – Labor and coalition – have triple A credit ratings and do a solid job.
NSW Labor is on the nose because it’s been in office a long time and the grievances mount up. Most of the so-called scandals are pretty minor or media beat-ups, but the odd MP has let the side down badly and electricity privatisation issue has been very damaging. But, from afar, KKK seems to be performing well.
Queensland is always hard to assess. There’s certainly some potential to turn the clock back even further up there.
18
Queensland tends to vote down daylight savings.
Kevin Bonham
Posted Saturday, January 8, 2011 at 2:55 pm | Permalink
“The latest (Qld) poll shows Labor’s primary vote at 26%…very like the NSW polls,and the Victoria was a good example – at one point polls were showing a big swing from Labor going mainly to the Greens, but in the end it went mainly to the Coalition. ”
Vic position , agree thats absolute correct
What Vic Liberals did public was put Greens last on there HTV card , and said Greens were idealogical far left , and an echo of what Libs Howard & Lib Senator Helen Kroger accurately also ssaid a few days earlier in public Result was Labor vote still wnt down , but it was Liberal vote that went up in part due to liberals putting Greens last , and there ws no swing to Greens at all
What we see in 39/61 NSW and 41/59 Q’ld Newspolls is middle australien thoughts of Greens being toxic has already hapened in those Polls !
(Most of Labor’s lost Vote in NSW and Q’ld not gone to Greens Party but direct to th Liberols/pro Liberal pref Partys , which finaly did hapen on Poll day in Vic Electon)
Key to assess greens toxicness ro middle australian voters is th NSW and Q’ld 2 PPT voting of 39/61 & 41/59
(Bligh has time , but Fed Mining tax elephant is a prob howevr both privaize & petrol issues were her own goals , but being n govt for few yrs means she can still win)
Ron
There has to be a difference between the ALP putting the Greens last in states with OPV versus those without. I can see it helping in SA or Vic where they will still get most of the prefs but in Qld and NSW, Greens voters will just vote 1 Green and not preference.
Here we go – the same Labor hacks on here who predicted a Labor win in Victoria deluding themseles to believe Bligh will win.
I remember reading the lines “relax guys, Brumby will win a majority” or “Gillard will win a majority for sure” …
Bligh is terminal. If Labor don’t bone her, they’re dead.
Ron 20
Faced with disaster Ron tells us again and again that the real enemies are the Greens… and their “toxicness…perhaps he means toxicity…do you Ron?
[Here we go – the same Labor hacks on here who predicted a Labor win in Victoria deluding themseles to believe Bligh will win.]
…yes, I remember posting something along the lines “Gee, I really misread the Vic election as I thought it was going to be a close thing” and honestly thought I was out of touch as all the Vics were saying ALP would win easily.
Must remember to trust my judgement more. Seems I am more in touch from NSW than the ALP are in Vic. Must be all this “the world is out to get us” stuff…
Too bad for the LNP that the next election is not until April 2012.
my predict of vic electon was I cold not see Bailaueu getting th 13 seats he needed , and that Brumby would win narrow
I ALSO predict 2 weeks out on th xact day that Bailleau public making Greens LAST , it would swing votes to him and was decisive moment to then , as none decisive happened after tht it was most decisive action taken , to libs benefit Vic Labor Secsince public has said BOTH of my points public ,
thats no suprise reely seeing benefit to Libs reasonable obvous in getting middle oz voters in SE ans S seats to whom toxicness of Greens is blatant
I mean afterall Greens is a radical out there lu la land Party with almost 90% of voters NOT votin for them so any semblanse of an allianse at all with Brumby to them was deemed toxic , and pssiblility was there with Greens trying to pinch 6 safe labor seats with there on ground smears
Diogenous
re th numerous benfits to Labor in putting Greens last on Labor’s HTV i wont list now , however on your point that of couse voting system you says will not apply in a Fed election ! tho you is absolute rite where you said , and but exhuast does already occur and quiet big in some seats but can be all ovr place in numbers so ffect may be variable with no uniform but on balnse yes some pain But then anyway pain for gain sometimes with long benefits better than short sicky
Carlton Crew @ 22 , given close to 50/50 polls , your first 2 lines lacks politcal logic re Victoria As to Qld my @20 addrss Greens politcal issue to address and my ast 2 lines addrsed 3 Labor polisys to address with yrs Bligh got t addrss AS th govt to change so you Q’ld claim lacks politcal logic she’s gone & now , geez Brumby was leading 55/45 bout 4 mths out Whilst youse Greens is pussycats , we labor people fight cause we go sensible econamic & equity based polisys (whereas greens went to vic electon refusing Treasury to cot any of there polisys a la abbott and we found 11.6 billion hole in abbots
I’d agree with Dio about the danger of Green preferences lost to Labor under OPV. They will not be uniform, and will be crucial in some seats. I recall that the inner Brisbane federal seat was lsto by Arch Bevis largely on Green preference flow, with Andrew Bartlett polling around 20%, similar to the Melbourne Ports situation. If that happened at the state level, Labor could easily lose inner Brisbane seats, not to mention places on the Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast. Hence I think it woudl be foolish for Labor to antagonise Green voters. In the past, poss of preferences under OPV between Liberal, National and One Nation helped Beatty romp home in some traditionaly conservative areas when things were going better of rLabor.
Wedging is not always the best strategy, even if it is all some know.
Ron
The problem with the ALP in NSW and Qld has 100% to do with the ALP. The followings are the factors, which I contribute to the slide
In NSW, the stuffing up of everything from Health (hospital stuff ups) to Transport (Lack of planning_ and lying (NW rail line for the 8th time) and general incompetancy and maybe corruption (2 MP leaving via rots and electricity)
In Qld, lying and backflip … Qld is 2 years behind NSW … it is terminal … the poll projection of the states for the last 8 years are identical…. Like NSW, Qld ALP will be shown to be better off to have lost the last election, then to have the government rotting tarnishing the ALP brand as a whole
Apart form that there is a real public perception that the ALP has moved so far to the right, they can rightly change their name to the Liberal lites. This is shown in the rise of the Green primary votes in the last 10 years, and the destruction of the ALP voting base in the last 10 years …. the ALP is at a primary low in almost every state and in the federal government.
As Ron said and as shown in Victoria, middle Australia (median income, 2 kids, mortgage) does have problem with some of Green’s policies (Drugs, Death taxes, general increase of taxes, Carbon tax -> cost of living). The problem that Ron has not realised yet is that with the collapse of the ALP vote, the ALP can only govern with Green’s support (Federal, Tasmania) … therefore if middle Australia have problem with Green policies, the ALP putting the Green last who not help the ALP at all … because the public would not want a Green-ALP government
Lastly as Socrate said, under OPV, Primaries are gold, because preferences are unreliable, unless the ALP can get their primaries back above at least 35% and most likely 40% …. the 2PP is almost meaningless
Toorak Toff
Media beatup
Like the Orange and Bathhurst hospital …. where after construction had began …. they found that the designs (signed off by the health minister) means that certain rooms are too small, and others did not have the structure support for Medical machinery … costing the taxpayers billions to change the plans?
Or the gridlock that is in NW Sydney every morning … because the government decided that those seats normally votes Liberals anyway … therefore they can lied 7 times about building the NW rail line … This is what Federal Labor had to said about the NSW Government, when the infrastructure handout was happening …. althrough the NW rail line had been proposed for years …. there had not even been a feasability study done … so Victoria got the railline instead.
Or the metro who no one wanted, Which was scrapped and cost the taxpayers hundreds of million … including the purchasing of property.
Some might call these minor …. most would call it complete utter incompetence
Small beer really, especially when the seats affected are mainly Liberal anyway. These things allone do not explain the big falling off of the Labor vote.
Dovif ,socrates and diogenous
is postin opinions , but th Poll Stats tell hard truth , greens is toxic
Fed position we got one th most divisive & shallow Lib leeders ever of history in Tony Abbott , yet th 2 PPT is 50/50 so th crucia swag votes did not go to Green , but Liberals vote is UP taken FROM Labor…those middle oz votes do not like greens , they went to liberals
Vic result showed it as well with Balleau putting Greens last , and where he won seats
And th same in other States , 2 PPT in WA 42/58 , NSW 39/61 and Q’ld 41/59 , those lost labor votes went TO LLiberals and not to Greens , thats why those 2 PPT is so strong to th Liberal party Evidense of Greens is toxic is rite accross oz Thats no suprise seeing almost 90% of oz do not vote Greens
and further so very perseption of Labor in any allianse with Greens is a switch off
Socrates & Dovif further
So labor should put Greens Last to truthful show what uneconamic & impractical ideas and hard radical idealogigy Greens is VS that Labor does provides sensibel core left values econamic and equity & social reforms and that does incl in Q’ld Exhaust rate in last penrith by election was 65% Think some pain is worht benefits
and 2nd to brordly re-address re both 2 own goal isues i listed in last 2 lines of @20 , plus hope 3rd issue thats killing them in Qld th Fed Labor mining tax is resolved by Fed Labor to Labors econamic & equity satisfcton & sold well 9seeeing 4th factor , bligh s not Beattie can not be fixed)
and 3rd , Labor needs to call out publicly espec both th MSN and th Greens for there continued smear lies that Labor has gone rite Such unsubstanted shallow slogans is also repated on PB by partisien BS Lib & green bloggers
(I’ve posted Labor’s 3 yr term of over 60 wide ranging ministerial areas incl CC , proving core left values reforms enacted into law by Labor , except only Labors very sensible econamci , enviro & social CC ETS Bill is not Law only because Libs & Greens formed there harlot allianse to obsrtruxt Labors CC reform What is put against that Labor list of facts…empty slogans
Ron
Labor putting the Greens last federally would certainly make more sense than them doing it in NSW or Qld with OPV.
However, the Greens are pretty irrelevant in State politics so it is very easy to dump on them there and I can easily see Rann doing so. The Greens are much more involved federally and their agreement with Labor would make it very difficult for Labor to put them last if the Greens are seen to be playing nicely with Labor.
How would Gillard justify putting the Libs ahead of the Greens when the Greens have supported her and Abbott has opposed everything she has done? I can’t see it happening.
because i can name every major Bill brought in by Fed Labor from aug 2009 where Greens lied nd smeared labor using popularism tactics
So bcause thats is only way Greens can continue to hold those votes AT Labor’s expense So time for labor to retaliate to tell those votes what greens dare not say about there nutty polisys Both can play that not just greens
Just as vip is i do xpect 2012 on CC to be a repeat of 2009 CC where Greens cyniclly tried to pinch labor votes seeing Labor aint moving on its ETS & its 5% (except may be a fraction for 2 Inde’s) and yet Milne 2 wks ago said 40% cut is what Greeens want , and well Greens 25% was never accept to labor on any sensible econamic or social basis to labor , but Greens need that 25% at least figure to keep there voters conned on uneconamic ideas & non reel total world piktures , so that will be a bigger dirct clash I expect (an if Abbott makes greens last it will be even easier to show up Greens zealots as thats how One Nation exxtremists at othr end got expozed by both Partys)
should made clear my view that Libs wont be out of fire ranges either , result wuld not only Labor being attacked on 2 CC fronts , it unlike prev will fight both fronts
Ron
None of that explains why Labor would put the Libs ahead of the Greens. How would they explain that they are actually closer to the Libs than Greens when they are in Coalition with the Greens?
It’s not going to happen.
Ron
Unless you can write a post that is coherent and without misspellings why bother? Try drafting your posts in a decent word processor, run the text through and then read it carefully, aloud, and see if it makes any sense.
When you have done that perhaps you will give us the benefit of your ideas as to what constitutes, in your fevered mind, the Greens’ zealotry and “lu la” policies instead of writing endless really stupid posts that simply get in the way of the usually cojerent dialog here.
Someone once suggested you are dyslexic. That is an insult to those who really have that condition. I think you are just drunk – perhaps on alcohol or perhaps, if one is to be charitable, intoxication that your ravings are taken seriously by the likes of Dio.
Or to put it another way – less might be more.
Diogenous
you keep beleiving that Context of my comments is what i said and Greens keep playing there snip games or if 2012 runs out same as 2009 with Greens spoil smear tatcics , then labor cn say publicly they’ve got a devils choice beteen Greens promising mass unemploy higher inteerst rates and social dislocation VS Liberals being CC deniers and beleive in w/c Whether such Greens spoiling for cynical vote chasing arises , again , such event can result either in putting th Greens last that i favor or sayin above as an explian for an open ticket effect is similar benefit for Labor Stats across oz is reel figures of events
Albert Ross , moron , use skip button for all i care
Ron
You could argue for an open ticket in Reps but the Senate is more of a problem unless they went 50-50. You still haven’t explained how Gillard could justify putting the Libs ahead of her Coalition partner. One has opposed her every step of the way and the other is supporting her to be PM.
Greens is not a coalition partner so your Q does not apply Now Labor has greens wilkie & 2 separate Inde’s ie 3 signed arrangmnets mainly linked to supply only , plus each with generic words , no more So Labor is free to do whatever it chooses heading into next election re what i said in #40 and which did explian what truthful & politcal reasonable reasons can be given to Public , a public that per my @33 clearly aint luv of Greens but instead show voter intent fron labor to lib
Ron
I just cannot see ALP attacking the Greens and then announcing a preference deal just before every election working
Quite simply ALP needs the Green and Green’s preference for re-elction, without them the ALP cannot govern. The ALP attacking the Greens and then go begging for their preferences, is not something that could work
Discussion of matters psephological would be helped if it started with an accurate account of the evidence – for example in Victoria the Greens vote at the State election last year increased from 10% in 2006 to 11.2% in the lower house Not a big increase but an increase nonetheless.
Policy discussion would also be helped by reference to actual policies espoused by the Greens and factually based explanations as why they are undesirable rather than simply labelling them as poisonous.
Discussion which starts from respect for the people from whom you differ might have the advantage of lowering blood pressure all round and lead to greater enlightenment and understanding as to why people hold views which differ from those that seem blindingly obvious to you.
Love your neighbour, even if they vote Green, there’s a thought. Given the statistics it is likely that at least one of your near neigbours has actually voted Green.
Ron
At least I can write a post that has virtually no spellos, punctuation and grammatical errors. Why don’t you give it a try and then people other than Dio might take you in any way seriously?
Then you could address this sort of hysterical ravings: Greens promising mass unemploy higher inteerst rates and social dislocation
And what do you mean by the “skip button?? Is this another of your imaginings?
Be less of a wanker please, Albert Ross.
[44 dgh1Posted Monday, January 10, 2011 at 11:40 am | PermalinkDiscussion of matters psephological would be helped if it started with an accurate account of the evidence – for example in Victoria the Greens vote at the State election last year increased from 10% in 2006 to 11.2% in the lower house Not a big increase but an increase nonetheless.
Policy discussion would also be helped by reference to actual policies espoused by the Greens and factually based explanations as why they are undesirable rather than simply labelling them as poisonous.
Discussion which starts from respect for the people from whom you differ might have the advantage of lowering blood pressure all round and lead to greater enlightenment and understanding as to why people hold views which differ from those that seem blindingly obvious to you.
Love your neighbour, even if they vote Green, there’s a thought. Given the statistics it is likely that at least one of your near neigbours has actually voted Green.
]
What a complete load of Greens bunkum.
The Greens are playing politics – but squeal when their rank hypocricy is exposed for what it is.
dgh1
my #33 ‘
A/ ” Fed position we got one th most divisive & shallow Lib leeders ever of history in Tony Abbott , yet th 2 PPT is 50/50 so th crucia swag votes did not go to Green , but Liberals vote is UP taken FROM Labor ”
B/ ” ‘2 PPT in WA 42/58 , NSW 39/61 and Q’ld 41/59 , those lost labor votes went TO LLiberals and not to Greens ”
C/ Vic election , polls showed big swing to Greens , virtualy until Balleau public said Liberals will put Greens last pref Liberals vote went up , and Greens down Whats more Greens vote ws down 2.1% from there Vic votes in Fed election 3 mths earlier so clearly Bailuea stuck an anti green cord saying a Labor/Greens allianse’
so we’ve got recent results at Fed level 21/8 , a vic election 27/11 , and WA , NSW & Q’ld where votes went FROM Labor TO Liberals , and NOT lost Labor goin to th Greens
a/ Labor needs to untach itself from th greens virus that middle australien voters on all these figures show there nn votee for , an given almost 90% do not vote Green anyway that 90% shows not just anti feelings , but actual above polls show its more , virus and semblance of an ‘allianse’ a putt off to middle australian/swing voters
B/ So either my pref of putting greens ;ast like Balleau or an open ticket is needed
C/ every time Greens popularism snipe labor polisys , shoot them , just like Labor does to th Liberals
D/ clearly Fed labor gots some own gaols of its own to address as well , & needs to
E/ clearly Q’ld Labor has also kicked some own goals to adress eg privatize issue & petrol bit , plus Fed Labor Mining Tax is a big problam in Q’d a Mining state (they await Fed Labor (hope) to resolve but still with equity of mining booms 2 going to Supa incr , lower busss taxes & infrastuctre $’s)
want eg of a lunatic Greens polisy , Greens public statd non negotable 35% CC used as xcuse to block 3 Labor ETS’s that gave cuts of 23% from july 2011 to 2020 , a Greens 25% when our 4 Major trading partners got no ETS , & so a 25% that wiuld bring gross adverse econamic and social cnosequences incl higher unemploy and higner interest rates etc etc to oz in totals , to oz buss and to oz peoples
Ron
in the days of yore, when the ETS was in debate…
The Greens supporting it would not have been sufficient to get it into legislation, since the Greens + ALP did not have the numbers in the Senate.
You sound like you are trolling with partisan spin on that issue.
The difference of opinion generally is whether negotiating with Xenophon, Fielding and maybe some rebellious Liberals and the Greens could have found a workable compromise. I don’t get the impression that the ALP saw that as possible but i’m not sure how hard they tried….
Too late now, maybe something good will happen in July. 🙂
Despite your sense of horror about the Greens they seem to be able to compromise and work OK with the ALP in Tasmania and the ACT, oh and with the Social Democrats in Germany and Conservatives in Austrian states and with rural farmer groups in Lithuania and broad left coalitions in Italy and France….
Take a deep breath and come to terms with the Greens , despite the vagaries of elections they’ll be around for a while and you don’t have to agree with them.
Please substtantiate your comparison with One Nation? Apart from not being from the old parties…
The response to my comments perfectly illustrated problem that I was addressing – I was asking for factually informed debate on issues. I was addressing an issue of how we debate matters not making a partisan case – if calling for rational and civil debate is regarded as “Green bunkum” and an attempt to avoid criticism of Green policies then we are in an Alice in Wonderland world indeed.