David Penberthy on Twitter conveys tomorrow’s Sunday Mail front page, showing a Galaxy poll conducted on Thursday and Friday evenings has the Coalition leading 51-49 (compared with 55-45 in the poll a fortnight ago), with Kevin Rudd holding a 51-34 lead over Tony Abbott as preferred prime minister. More to follow.
UPDATE: I can reveal the poll has Labor’s primary vote up six to 38%, 57% supporting the leadership change, and 52% thinking Bill Shorten personally did the right thing in switching to Rudd against 30% for the wrong thing. Still a few gaps to be filled there of course.
UPDATE 2: GhostWhoVotes has full tables: Coalition down three to 44%, Greens down one to 10%.
alias,
Labor used to be focussed on policy. Sadly, that has been thrown out the window in favour of shallow populism.
The battle now seems to be between two unscrupulous, lying, sell your grandmother groups hoping the other one gets voted off the island.
At least the Libs are honest about their intentions.
CTar1
[Big round glasses boy?]
Not following, sorry
Confessions
I don’t believe I made any comment about the likely level of resignations or otherwise. But it’s been a long time, and plenty of posts, so I won’t say categorically that I have never said anything of the kind.
It really would be wonderful if you would let me know what your objective is between now and the election. What are you working for? What is your goal?
On another topic, I sat with my father watching much of the ceremony to mark the death of Dr Yunupingu today.
It was really very moving I felt. I lived up there for a while and was fortunate enough to make some brief visits to Yirrkala and other spots in Gumatj country, and met Dr Yunupingu on several occasions. What a great man, he was.
But it was rather striking to see Peter Garrett as MC and Kevin Rudd sitting there in the front row, with Bruce Hawker a couple of rows back. Perhaps this has been covered, but did they all fly up together? Garrett seemed quite disrespectful of Rudd I felt, given that it was an occasion where such antipathy should have been set aside.
It was also a rather wonderful moment when Peter Garrett provided back-up harmonies to some Gumatj women singing the hymn “Just a closer walk with thee”, acapella.
ShowsOn:
I’m not in any way suggesting that he should be lost entirely to the Labor cause.
I personally think he’d make an excellent Labor candidate for the Qld seat of Ashgrove, and after his twitter attacks on Campbell Newman, has the added bonus of having already paved the way to being LOTO in Qld.
He would surely unseat Newman, and may even make a wonderful Qld Premier one day. It’s a win-win for everyone: the man himself, Qlders who can’t get enough of him, and those who feed off his martyr mentality.
Hi Lizzie re 1124
A psychologist and no mention of sociopath? Can’t be right….
Psychologist Lyn Bender says Rudd is on the classic hero’s journey. ”He’s been mocked, belittled and abused … and to see him come back against impossible odds, is quite heroic. The timing is excellent because there isn’t enough time for it to wear off.”
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/its-nuts-but-rudd-really-can-do-coalition-heads-in-20130629-2p46o.html#ixzz2XgrdGtYb
F
The ALP will never be “at peace”
Any party which wishes to improve matters and has to fight against the status quo will never be “at peace”.
Any party which comes into being due to the exploitation of others and opposed conservatism will never “be at peace”.
Progress means change. Change means confronting conservatism. This does not lead to anyone being “at peace”
I would hate Labor to be “at peace”.
It must be right, because the Age is completely committed to a vigorous democratic debate about policy.
Confessions
My most recent post was written without reference to your most recent one.
So I get it: Rudd leads Labor to a miraculous victory, a victory that seemed simply unimaginable just a week or so ago, and bingo, he gets persuaded to step aside and quit politics.
Really? I mean this victory will be more remarkable and unexpected than Keating’s in 1993. This will be a stunning rebuff to the conservative forces in this country which have, for months now, simply assumed it was in the bag.
And you think that Rudd is going to just walk away? Or that he would not be a hero of great standing in the Labor movement for having pulled off such a victory? (And yes I realise that any so-called ‘hero’ status would always be tempered by the fact that many don’t like him, but politics is about winning).
slack boy72 @1131
There is no evidence in the article linked, that PMJG white-anted or undermined PMKR. So your post is just plain wrong.
(Objective: tell truth.
Result: Success)
Anyway, have been called to attend to domestic duties so signing off for now.
Mumbles on the Liberal conference in Victoria:
[Peter Brent @mumbletwits 4h
Dear @markatextor, are u able to explain political purpose of creepy Melbourne Liberal Hillsong-US-Republican televised love-in?
Expand]
I saw a bit on ABC24 news and it did look a bit like a US style religious rally for the faithful, with a uniform blue colour everywhere.
The battle now seems to be between two unscrupulous, lying, sell your grandmother groups hoping the other one gets voted off the island.
GG,
That is why I think that, for this election at least, voters may more likely focus on policy rather than on the leaders which means the Government is in with a strong chance of being returned.
alias:
FWIW, I think an election win for the govt is now even further away than it may have been before the leadership change, for the reasons I outlined before the leadership change.
GG
The “good policy will win us government” died with JG.
We are now in the era of spruikers and carpetbaggers.
Get used to this.
Julia was good at policy and wiped the floor with Abbott in the House.
For her troubles Labor stood to be wiped out at the coming election.
She was right in what she was doing but it did not make a blind bit of difference.
[alias,
Labor used to be focussed on policy. Sadly, that has been thrown out the window in favour of shallow populism.]
Labor does still deal in policy. For example the new Labor Prime Minister supports same-sex marriage.
Welcome to the future G.G.
[Julia was good at policy and wiped the floor with Abbott in the House.]
Why do you think this matters? Most people don’t watch parliament. Most people don’t even watch TV news anymore.
[I saw a bit on ABC24 news and it did look a bit like a US style religious rally for the faithful, with a uniform blue colour everywhere.]
And what about that HILARIOUS part where Joe Hockey JOKED about failing to drown the prime minister!
Politicians making JOKES about drowning each other is exactly what the nation needs. Joe Hockey is such a great politician.
Tricot,
Yeah, 20 odd years of economic prosperity has many voters believing that any one could manage a complex economy and a hollowgram is all you need for Leadership.
☵ Z☰N Digital ® ☲ @z3n_digital 24m
#MyLiberal and Greg Hunt refuse to release details / costing on Direct Action policy until after the election #auspol http://www.mccullough.com.au/page/Media/Carbon_credits_carbon_price_and_carbon_farming__Key_details_of_the_Oppositions_climate_and_environmental_plans/ …
[Mumbles on the Liberal conference in Victoria:]
I said earlier that Abbott looked like a televangelist. Good to see others picking up on that.
🙂
Hey guys and gals, the main game is fighting Tories not each other.
The Queen is no more, the King needs all the help he can get. So help him win.
Its not rocket science.
confessions
Yep, and the song they are going to play is
“The televangelist and Margie and the kids”
[There is no evidence in the article linked, that PMJG white-anted or undermined PMKR. So your post is just plain wrong]
Er, Gillard’s words were to the effect of the ALP was walking blindfolded off a cliff.
I suppose she was right, just not in the way she meant. It’s a good thing though, the ALP were looking like falling off a cliff until the second change.
[Labor used to be focussed on policy. Sadly, that has been thrown out the window in favour of shallow populism.]
On some issues yes, on some no. Cracking down on 457 visas and subsidising the car industry are populism, though there are some respectable arguments to be made for both. Not stopping the boats is anti-populism – pandering to the elite in defiance of popular opinion.
AA
More proof of the existence of the Great Wall of Credlin.
victoria:
🙂
[There is no evidence in the article linked, that PMJG white-anted or undermined PMKR. So your post is just plain wrong]
Gillard should’ve refused to challenge Rudd. In fact she should’ve told the people agitating for change that if they wanted to challenge Rudd they would also have to challenge her position as deputy leader.
The fact Gillard challenged a Labor PM (not just opposition leader) and won meant she would always be vulnerable to the same thing happening to her.
[There is no evidence in the article linked, that PMJG white-anted or undermined PMKR. So your post is just plain wrong.]
This is all ancient history now. Time to move on.
*Puts on Kevin 07 hat and sings Happy Little Vegemites.
Psephos,
Kevvie and the Ruddista waves singing “Walking on sunshine” is just a warm up to “Send in the Clowns’.
Liberal Election Platform
“We will provide details of our policies and explain what we will do after the election”
Just remember we are not Labor – trust us!!!
“*Puts on Kevin 07 hat and sings Happy Little Vegemites.”
That takes me back to Happy Hammond & Princess Panda….
F
“just a warm up to “Send in the Clowns’. ”
As in waiting for Abbott & the Libs?
F
hmmm
[Kevin Rudd now takes up the role of Prime Minister. The Labor Party may well have had no choice but to re-elect Rudd but his brother, Greg, said on Ellen Fanning’s Observer Effect on SBS last week that Kevin was better suited to running BHP than being a political leader. As Greg Rudd pointed out, in one role you tell people what to do, in the other you have to take people with you. He described his brother as a skyrocket leader – quick to go up, quick to come down. Kevin has now left the launching pad for the second time. Where will he land?
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/angels-thin-on-the-ground-in-a-week-of-brutal-politics-20130628-2p2tg.html#ixzz2Xh1Xz9ay
]
[Psephos,
Kevvie and the Ruddista waves singing “Walking on sunshine” is just a warm up to “Send in the Clowns’.]
Grow up G.G. Your candidate lost, but there is now a competitive election contest that could go either way depending on what the Government does between now and election day and how well supporters chip in and campaign.
Shows on @1166
I have made this point myself many times.
For three years I have watched reports here from PBers of Julia’s wiping the floor with Abbott in Question Time. I am sure she did but most who vote neither care nor watch about QT as you have rightly said.
We are now in the era of the spruiker, carpetbagger and huckster.
The electorate would not know good policy when it hit them over the head but they love a Grand Final competition between Rudd and Abbott.
They understand this.
Gonski et al are beyond them.
tricot
True.
It all has a weird ‘suvivor/masterchef/aussie idol’ feel about it.
But where is Larry with the terminally-ill teddy-bear?
GG, Happy Little Vegemites is now the official ALP campaign song, so get with the program. I’m sure you don’t want the Libs to win McEwen.
[We are now in the era of the spruiker, carpetbagger and huckster.
The electorate would not know good policy when it hit them over the head but they love a Grand Final competition between Rudd and Abbott.
They understand this.]
Good politics has long been the ability to mix good policy with good presentation. It is absurd to say that whoever has the best policy wins.
Here is an example. Labor now accepts that we have a broad based consumption tax called the GST. No Labor government will ever propose repealing the GST and replacing it with, for example, dramatically increased income taxes.
But Paul Keating won the 1993 election opposing a GST.
So arguably he adopted a policy position that Labor now accepts was wrong, but Keating’s presentation was good enough to win an election.
If politics was simply about having the right policy, Labor would never lose an election.
[Labor used to be focussed on policy. Sadly, that has been thrown out the window in favour of shallow populism.]
Oh please. Quiggan has put pay to this already. Qs for the few policy changes Ive heard mooted so far (restoring single mothers benefits/ the no-brainer of SSM), Im in favour. Policy front improving. The latter may be populist – though its also progressive, the former is not at all populist.
[ My objective, and the objective those like me, was to see Rudd returned to the office of PM to make give Labor a reasonable shot at another term. ]
This sounds fine and dandy. But only if you believe Rudd will win. But I’m not so sure this is going to happen. I always thought Gillard had Abbott’s number. I’m not sure Rudd has.
The electorate knows Rudd’s deficiencies now, and they are massive. So much so that his own party tore him down, and a large number of senior Labor people are now resigning rather than having to face the prospect of working with him again. I’m not interested in starting an argument about the fine detail of this, and which faction was right and which was wrong – it is simply the case that Rudd was a dysfunctional PM that had to be – and was – removed before his whole charade of a government collapsed collapsed under its own internal fractures.
So the only possible justification for bringing Rudd back is that he wins the election. Then he can be (again) dealt with if he gets out of hand. You can argue as to whether this is likely to be needed or not, or whether Rudd has indeed “learned his lesson” – again, it is not germane to the subject at hand.
What is germane is that Labor has re-appointed a known dysfunctional leader in a move that looks like simple desperation, and is obviously a last ditch effort to win the election. It has not been done for any ideological, moral or even factional reasons. Not even for the entirely specious reason of “righting past wrongs”.
The only possible reason for returning for Rudd should be to win the election. And if he does, I will admit it may have been justifiable.
But if he does not, Labor has now sunk itself to a level from which it is unlikely ever to recover. It will be (rightly) considered a laughingstock for decades to come. Knocking off two reigning PM’s in a row? When the only opposition was a fruitcake like Abbott? Who would ever vote for them again, trust them again, or ever believe anything they say again?
So Rudd has achieved an initial bounce in the polls. That was inevitable – only the size of the bounce was unknown. But so far the bounce is not (of itself) enough to win the election, so there will probably not be an early election, and Rudd will have to now do the hard yards of campaigning. This is something he is not particularly good at, especially now that he will also have to face all the negatives that we know will be thrown at him by the media and the LNP – “flip-flopper”, “dysfunctional”, “autocratic”, “arrogant”, “potty mouth”, “kevin o’lemon”, “gillard stalker”, “white-anter”, “untrustworthy”, “war monger”, “Mr programmatic specificity” etc etc.
And what does he have to offer other than Gillard’s policies, a smarmy smile and penchant for stupid Australianisms (“fair suck of the sauce bottle”, “happy little vegemite” etc etc)? Not much, as far as I can tell. And in any debates against Abbott, the most likely outcome is that the audience will die of boredom, not that Rudd will slice Abbott to shreds (as Gillard could so easily have done).
This was a very, very risky move by Labor. If it works it may be applauded. If it fails it will definitely and quite rightly be absolutely ridiculed. At present, it looks more like failing than succeeding.
BTW. has the Great Termite picked his pack yet, who are to be the lucky sods carrying his drink trays?
Kind of in response to alias’ silly prodding about what the goal of non-Rudd-suppoerters might be:
Of course I can only speak for myself. I support the ALP only as long as they represent what I consider to be the better option.
How the ALP goes about its internal organisation and policy development, as well as their ability to manage policy implementation in government and budget well etc etc all factor into such a decision.
Discarding all assessments apart from “win at any cost” doesn’t encourage me to think better of the ALP, and I’m obviously deeply suspicious of Kevin Rudd’s leadership style and how he might go in terms of policy determination and implementation.
Of course there are specific considerations for this election, and stuff like maintaining the carbon price (I don’t care about transition issues with the fixed price – irrelevant to the long term integrity of the scheme), NBN, NDIS, Gonski, etc, IS an important consideration. If I wasn’t worried about maintaining these policies, I would probably swing decisively to “punish the ALP for being short sighted and facilitating/rewarding bad behaviour”.
But in the circumstances, I agree that an ALP win this term or at least a close result that doesn’t let the LNP control the senate is important. 2016 will be quite a different matter in my mind.
So for now I’ll keep my antipathy towards Kevin Rudd at least a little bit under control.
I’m not interested in waving through Rudd hagiographies or blatant misrepresentations of the past. Honesty is still important in Australian politics, or at least I hope so.
If Rudd crashes and burns I’ll have a little chuckle, gloat and schadenfreude. If he loses narrowly and then bows out of politics graciously, I will give him credit. If he wins, well … that will be an interesting situation for the ALP to deal with.
I’m sure you don’t want the Libs to win McEwen.
I don’t want them to win Warringah…
[This is all ancient history now. Time to move on.
*Puts on Kevin 07 hat and sings Happy Little Vegemites.]
Thats the spirit. When did pragmatism become a dirty word in ALP circles? Back when I was involved, it was a beloved credo.
Player One,
get with the program, didn’t you hear. They knifed Gillard so they could save the furniture. Like that mouldy old sofa over there with Kevvie’s aske print in it.
#MyLiberal and Greg Hunt refuse to release details / costing on Direct Action policy until after the election #auspol http://www.mccullough.com.au/page/Media/Carbon_credits_carbon_price_and_carbon_farming__Key_details_of_the_Oppositions_climate_and_environmental_plans/ …
just a tax by another name.
Psephos,
My preference is for “Sunshine, lolly pops and rainbows”.
Rob Mitchell is a good bloke and I wish him well. Unfortunately, I live in Jaga Jaga, so I can’t give him my vote.
I want an Indie to win Griffith.
[Not stopping the boats is anti-populism – pandering to the elite in defiance of popular opinion.]
Good to see you recognise what is elite thinking on the matter.
So, is elite thinking disseminated? Through smart people who understand and support this type of thinking and who are bestowed the virtue of leadership.
Pandering to xenophobic tendencies in the electorate is taking leadership from sections of society who should never be paid attention to without leaving them unheard.
If you also think that elite thinking is about encouraging people to get on boats, then you have no idea how true progressives actually think. When the conversation cracks open, you will be totally unprepared for how true progressives will attempt to solve the overarching problem.
Of course what I am talking about is strong non military actions to force an open and accessible dialogue in countries where people are fleeing from oppression. It doesn’t matter where in the world open dialogue exists, bigots lose. Bigotry is the single biggest problem that exists everywhere within this issue and others. Who would argue that ultimately, the reason people flee is because of bigotry escalated to it’s ugliest.
We could be a source of the greatest force against bigotry.
Oh, and has the rodent cuddler managed to get through a weekend without rodent cuddling any one?