GhostWhoVotes relates that what I believe will be Fairfax’s second final monthly Nielsen poll has Labor leading 53-47 on two-party preferred, from primary votes of 39% for the Coalition, 37% for Labor and 13% for the Greens. While being well on trend, this marks a big improvement for the Coalition on last month, which was their worst poll result of the post-budget blowout: 56-44 on two-party preferred, from primary votes of 40% for Labor, 35% for the Coalition and 14% for the Greens. Leadership ratings to follow shortly.
UPDATE: The Nielsen poll has Tony Abbott up a point on approval to 35% and down two on disapproval to 60%; Bill Shorten down five to 42% and up two to 41%; and Shorten’s lead as preferred prime minister down from 51-40 to 47-40. Questions on preferred party leaders found Malcolm Turnbull favoured to lead the Liberal Party by 40% compared with 21% for Abbott and 11% for both Joe Hockey and Julie Bishop, while Bill Shorten led the Labor pack with 25% to 19% for Anthony Albanese, 17% for Tanya Plibersek and 7% each for Tony Burke and Chris Bowen. A question from the previous poll concerning whether the budget was fair was revisited, again finding 33% agreeing that it was, with disagreement down two points to 61%. On the question of sending Australian soldiers to Iraq, 31% said they would be in favour with 66% opposed.
Other recent polling snippets:
• The Sunday News Limited papers report that a Galaxy Research poll of 1010 women aged between 18 and 44 found 60% thought the government’s proposed paid parental leave scheme was fair, with 29% thinking it not fair and 6% believing it was not enough.
• The Conversation reports a JWS Research poll conducted for the Climate Institute finds a 10% increase in belief in (presumably anthropogenic) climate change since 2012 to 70%, together with a range of negative results for the government: a net rating of minus 18% for the present government’s performance on climate change compared with minus 1% for the previous government in the earlier poll, and a slight majority of 34% to 30% in favour of the carbon pricing laws, a dramatic reversal from the 28% and 52% recorded in 2012.
• Roy Morgan has a phone poll of 638 respondents on the biggest problems facing Australia, which has “politics and leadership” up seven points since February to 18%, the economy up three points to 42% and “religion/immigration/human rights” down seven to 9%.
UPDATE (Essential Research): The weekly result from Essential Research records a move back to the Coalition, who are up one on the primary vote to 40% with Labor down three to 38%, while the Greens and Palmer United are steady on 9% and 5%. Labor’s two-party preferred lead has narrowed from 54-46 to 52-48. Further questions relate to Iraq, with 25% thinking the 2003 invasion the right decision versus 50% for the wrong decision, 53% nominating “to support the USA” as the Howard government’s main reason for getting involved, 39% saying they would approve of US action to support the Iraq government in its current crisis with military action with 31% opposed, and 54% saying they would disapprove of Australia sending troops with 30% approving.
The poll also finds 28% felt the Greens holding the Senate balance of power was good for Australia versus 37% for bad, with 26% and 39% responses for the looming circumstance of Palmer United and micro-parties holding the balance of power. We also get the regular arsenal of “leaders attributes” questions applied to Clive Palmer and Christine Milne, with the former turning up rather poorly, with high rating for arrogant, aggressive and erratic. Christine Milne breaks 50% on “out of touch with ordinary people”, but otherwise seems to have made less of an impression. Both rate quite highly on intelligent and hard-working, but successful politicians nearly always do.
Finally, the poll finds only 19% agreeing with Tony Abbott that no election promises were broken in the budget, with 72% disagreeing.
Maybe they mention Springstreet because state voting results are overdue for Victoria from neilson. We haven’t seen the fallout from shaw dramas
Accidentally found myself reading the Sunday Times in a cafe today, which referred to a poll carried out by Galaxy of WA state voting intention (and a bunch of issues based polling). One of the reports said WA Labor came ahead on 2PP, and that Alannah McTiernan (Federal Labor for Perth) has a nose ahead of McGowan as preferred premier, with Barnett trailing. No tables or numbers on voting intention as far as I could see but wondered whether Mr Bowe had seen this. Not often that we see WA state polling.
Its interesting that this Nielsen records the vote of ‘Others’, including PUP, as less than that of the election when it was 12.4%
The last 3 Nielsens have been 9,11 and 11 for ‘others’
The COALition has lost nearly 7% since the election and the Greens and the ALP have gained 8% combined.
Tony’s colleagues will not be happy.
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 45s
#Nielsen Poll Abbott: Approve 35 (+1) Disapprove 60 (-2) #auspol
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 42s
#Nielsen Poll Shorten: Approve 42 (-5) Disapprove 41 (+2) #auspol
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 48s
#Nielsen Poll Preferred PM: Abbott 40 (0) Shorten 47 (-4) #auspol
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 45s
#Nielsen Poll Is the Budget fair: Fair 33 (0) Not fair 61 (-2) #auspol
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 50s
#Nielsen Poll Aust sending soldiers to Iraq: Support 31 Oppose 66 #auspol
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/clock-ticking-on-reform-as-new-senate-ready-to-go/story-fn59niix-1226963088253#
[Clock ticking on reform as new Senate ready to go
The Australian June 23, 2014 12:00AM
David Crowe
Political Correspondent
Canberra
THE Abbott government is running out of time to secure Senate support for budget measures that are meant to take effect next week, amid new doubts over $12 billion in pension and welfare savings.
As Tony Abbott makes another attempt to repeal the carbon tax, his government is facing a new fight over social security reforms at the heart of two bills due for debate this week.
Bill Shorten is seeking to focus debate on controversial savings on family tax benefits, the Parenting Payment and the Seniors Supplement to reinforce Labor’s attack on the “unfair” budget.
The government’s strategy appears unlikely to overcome objections from Labor and the Greens but clears the way for a vote to repeal the carbon tax when the new Senate sits from early next month.]
see chart
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 1m
#Nielsen Poll Preferred LIB Leader: Abbott 21 Turnbull 40 Hockey 11 Bishop 11 #auspol
@Tom L/52
This one?
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/wa-speaks-housing-costs-mortgage-stress-in-perth-cripples-families-as-wa-becomes-unlivable/story-fnhocxo3-1226962480143
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 1m
#Nielsen Poll Preferred LIB Leader (Abbott/Turnbull): Abbott 30 Turnbull 62 #auspol
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 1m
#Nielsen Poll Preferred LIB Leader (Abbott/Turnbull, L/NP Voters): Abbott 59 Turnbull 39 #auspol
I’d had vague talk, Tom, but assumed it was some self-selecting online nonsense. Looking into it now I know there was more to it than that.
GhostWhoVotes @GhostWhoVotes 1m
#Nielsen Poll Preferred ALP Leader: Shorten 25 Albanese 19 Plibersek 17 Tony Burke 7 Bowen 7 #auspol
@William/63
Just posted at 61
Tom, William,
Was talking to my Mum today and she mentioned that she got “robo-polled”. Didn’t go into much detail other than asking questions about Barnett (who she hates with a passion).
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/why-july-1-cannot-come-soon-enough-for-tony-abbott-20140622-zsi2i.html
[Why July 1 cannot come soon enough for Tony Abbott
June 23, 2014 – 12:15AM
Michael Gordon
Political editor, The Age
First impressions are hard to shake. Voters thought the Abbott government’s first budget was unfair the moment they digested it and, almost six weeks on, that judgment hasn’t changed.
Despite an improvement in the Coalition primary and two-party preferred vote, the latest Age-Nielsen Poll represents a stunning 6.5 per cent swing against the Coalition since the election.
The proportion of voters who consider the budget to be unfair – 61 per cent – is virtually unchanged since the first post-budget poll, and mirrors the prime minister’s disapproval rating]
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/mud-flung-at-bill-shorten-by-rabid-right-shows-hes-a-threat-to-coalition-20140622-zshx1.html
[Mud flung at Bill Shorten by rabid right shows he’s a threat to Coalition
June 23, 2014 – 12:13AM
Mark Latham
It had to come, the character assassination of Bill Shorten. The Opposition Leader has been doing too well in the polls for Australia’s right-wing hunting pack to leave him untouched.
Listen to any radio shock jock or ranting TV host and the drum beat has started. The hunting pack’s star witness is a former Victorian Australian Workers Union official, Bob Kernohan. Earlier this month, he told the trade union royal commission that in the mid-1990s Shorten (then aged 28) urged him to ignore the rorting of union funds. This is precisely what the feral right wants to hear. It’s a chance to smear Shorten and practise the politics of personal destruction.]
http://theconversation.com/government-still-failing-the-fairness-test-with-voters-28306
[ 23 June 2014, 12.10am AEST
Government still failing the “fairness” test with voters
Michelle Grattan
Professorial Fellow at University of Canberra
The government has clawed back part of Labor’s big post-budget lead but is still decisively losing the argument over “fairness”, according to the latest Nielsen poll.]
Zoidlord @61
Actually can’t find the one I was referring to. But this appears to say the Lib/Lab primaries are on 24/25 which is crazy (though 24 for Libs probably doesn’t include the Nationals because there is no Coalition here anymore). My takeaways is that the generally accurate view that WA state politics attracts a very shallow pool is pretty widely held.
http://m.perthnow.com.au/news/opinion/joe-spagnolo-west-australians-not-inspired-by-party-leaders-according-to-the-wa-speaks-survey/story-fnhocuug-1226962354975
Comparing the personal stats of this Nielsen with the pre-budget Nielsen of April 13 which had the ALP leading by 52:48 we have:
*Abbott … approval has declined by 8%
………. disapproval has increased by 10%
for a worsening of the netsat by 18%.
Not good news.
*Shorten has remained pretty much static.
*PPM has worsened for Abbott from being ahead 45:44 to being behind 47:40.
More bad news for Tony.
The budget [and other things] has been good for the ALP and the Greens.
@Tom L/68
That’s interesting, I wonder if Federally people will wake up as did WA has done? After everything gone to crap.
http://www.afr.com/p/national/polls_shows_majority_think_budget_8BD1tJtoabj4bRZetirmHN
[Polls shows majority think budget ‘unfair’
PUBLISHED: 0 hour 19 MINUTES AGO | UPDATE: 0 hour 19 MINUTES AGO
Phillip Coorey Chief political correspondent
The Abbott government has clawed back some support after its unpopular budget but has failed to convince voters its tax rises and spending cuts are fair.
The latest TheAustralian Financial Review/Nielsen poll shows while the Coalition has cut into Labor’s strong post-budget lead, it trails by 53 per cent to 47 per cent and would have lost if an election was held on the weekend.
The poll of 1400 voters was taken from Thursday night to Saturday night. It found that 33 per cent think the budget is fair and 61 per cent believe it is not fair.]
http://www.afr.com/p/national/coalition_voters_turn_on_malcolm_tp8OhjAlmQGqEyVzQLOUqI
[Coalition voters turn on Malcolm Turnbull
PUBLISHED: 0 hour 20 MINUTES AGO | UPDATE: 0 hour 20 MINUTES AGO
Phillip Coorey Chief political correspondent
Malcolm Turnbull’s support among Coalition voters has fallen but he remains the overwhelming favourite among all voters as preferred Liberal leader.
The latest The Australian Financial Review/Nielsen Poll shows Bill Shorten as the preferred Labor leader, even over Anthony Albanese, who won the people’s vote during last year’s leadership ballot. The poll of 1400 voters shows that in a direct match-up, Mr Turnbull is preferred over Tony Abbott as leader by 62 per cent to 30 per cent of all voters.
The numbers are virtually the same as when the question was asked in June last year. However, then, Mr Turnbull and Mr Abbott were statistically tied among Coalition voters with Mr Turnbull’s support at 48 per cent and Mr Abbott’s at 50 per cent.]
Tom L@52
Thankyou for posting this – I had not seen it.
I have already updated “Turnbull PM: Not Likely Any Time Soon” with comments on Nielsen:
http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/turnbull-pm-not-likely-any-time-soon.html
Thanks all. I’m hoping Galaxy will be able to provide me with some hard detail tomorrow.
LOL
http://www.afr.com/p/national/gina_rinehart_pro_mining_prize_went_1bnK9qwTwno2zZMwQEj4RP
[Gina Rinehart’s $50,000 pro-mining prize went to fellow billionaire
PUBLISHED: 0 hour 20 MINUTES AGO | UPDATE: 0 hour 16 MINUTES AGO
Jonathan Barrett
Almost two years ago, Gina Rinehart offered a $50,000 prize to the person in the resources industry who best promoted mining in the face of “far left or non-understanding media attacks”.
The first recipient appears to have been fellow billionaire Len Buckeridge.
The curious award, the creation of which was announced at the annual Association of Mining and Exploration Companies conference in Perth in 2012, came amid a heated verbal stoush between Mrs Rinehart and then Labor treasurer Wayne Swan.]
Yay free speech!
http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/coal_mining_lobby_says_anti_investment_xPZH4eZbTQIhuBV7vrH4aM
[Coal-mining lobby says anti-investment campaign may be illegal
PUBLISHED: 0 hour 30 MINUTES AGO | UPDATE: 0 hour 25 MINUTES AGO
Amanda Saunders
A campaign to force banks and fund managers to pull capital from the coal industry could be in breach of the law and cost the economy billions, according to the mining lobby.
A paper to be released on Monday by the Minerals Council of Australia says the campaign “may contravene the letter or the spirit” of the Corporations Act, and calls on the corporate watchdog to assess the potential breach.
The council commissioned Sinclair Davidson, a professor of institutional economics at Melbourne’s RMIT University, to write the paper, in its most aggressive push-back to the anti-coal collective’s urging investors to sell shares in coal companies.
“To the extent that stigmatisation deliberately causes investors to make valuation errors and consequently rebalance their portfolios away from fossil fuel stocks, a violation of the Corporations Act has occurred,” Mr Davidson writes.]
Davidson is in the IPA, which isn’t mentioned in the article.
http://www.ipa.org.au/people/sinclair-davidson
jules
“Science may be great at measuring the physical world and then making accurate, meaningful statements about it, but it doesn’t necessarily provide the stuff you need to deal with things on a personal level. Pain, grief, unexpected success or failure, loss or gain etc etc.”
I’m aware we as a species may have a primitive need for religion to deal with these things, but I’ve been talking about whether or not Buddhism as a religion is true, not whether it’s useful. It could be that Buddhism is 100% required to live a perfectly happy and fulfilled life… this doesn’t make karma, nirvana or samsara factually correct precepts.
Also I’m quite able to deal with those things you mentioned without religious faith. As are many, many others.
Tom L@68
WA Speaks is clearly an opt-in and not a genuine poll, and therefore its results are unrepresentative. See here for an example of invitation to participate: http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/opinion/wa-speaks-have-your-say-about-wa/story-fnhocuug-1226938249626
Galaxy being commissioned to analyse the results makes no difference to all that.
Perhaps there is also Galaxy polling conducted on a proper basis alongside it. We live in hope.
Poll on climate policy, from JWS
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/22/australian-unhappy-coalitions-response-climate
[Australians unhappy over Coalition’s response to climate challenge
Number of people who accept that change is occurring rises 10 points to 70%, according to a new poll
Oliver Milman
theguardian.com, Monday 23 June 2014 01.00 AEST
The Australian public is deeply unhappy over the government’s response to the challenge of climate change, amid a revival in support for climate science and a strengthening belief that Australia is already feeling the impact of a warming planet, according to new polling.
The Climate of the Nation poll, conducted by JWS Research among 1,145 adult Australians on behalf of the Climate Institute, found that 70% accepted the mainstream scientific position that climate change is occurring.
This is a 10% increase compared to when the same question was asked in the poll in 2012, suggesting a rebounding public belief in the findings of the overwhelming majority of climate scientists. A further 89% said the effects of climate change were already beginning to bite in Australia.]
http://theconversation.com/climate-concern-grows-but-little-faith-in-leaders-on-the-issue-28304
[23 June 2014, 12.00am AEST
Climate concern grows – but little faith in leaders on the issue
Michelle Grattan
Professorial Fellow at University of Canberra
Australians are deeply cynical about both sides’ approach to climate change but especially mistrust Tony Abbott’s attitude, according to polling released by the Climate Institute on the eve of the reintroduction of the legislation to scrap the carbon tax.
Only one in five (20%) trust Abbott when he says he is concerned about addressing climate change, while 53% do not.
About three in ten (31%) trust Bill Shorten when he says he’s concerned, compared with 32% who do not.
Some one in five (19%) agree the Coalition has an effective plan to tackle climate change; around one in four (26%) agree Labor does.]
From Letters to the Editor.
Who advises Tony Abbott? Basic psychology would tell him that while “rewards” can help in the redirection of a child’s undesirable behaviour, by contrast, “bribes” are doomed to failure.
Similar principles prevail with Manus Island detainees. The offer of $10,000 to “depart” will almost surely generate an even greater influx, who will happily take the bribe, then go home, all expenses paid.
Worse still, a small entrepreneurial collective might pool their “bribes”, purchase a seaworthy craft in Indonesia (many for sale on the internet), and begin a highly profitable business of transporting prospective immigrants to Australian shores, to receive their hand-out.
John Feller Double Bay
I am prepared to pay $10,000 to Tony Abbott to call an election.
Peter Copleston Westleigh
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/john-hewson-is-right-tony-abbott-offers-no-vision-20140622-zshuo.html#ixzz35NkfEPk0
I doubt MacTiernan would come back to state politics. She could resign to run for the the state seat of Perth in March 2017 (held by a probable Lib oncer, Eleni Evangel), but when? If she resigned at the 2016 federal election, she’d either have only six months of leadership before the election, or lead the party from outside parliament Campbell Newman style – messy and destabilising either way. Any earlier, and she’d cause a federal by-election with a good chance of a swing to the Libs – that’d be rotten publicity for Shorten and co, who need to win seats in WA (at the very least, the new one).
Anyway, if 2013 was a repeat of 1996, 2017 could be a repeat of 2001. New opposition leader gets thumped at one election, hangs around for another four years, waits for the Lib govt to become unpopular and leads Labor back into power. No need to upset that applecart.
[75
absolutetwaddle
jules
“Science may be great at measuring the physical world and then making accurate, meaningful statements about it, but it doesn’t necessarily provide the stuff you need to deal with things on a personal level. Pain, grief, unexpected success or failure, loss or gain etc etc.”]
How do we know this is so?
Since emotions are essentially physical phenomena there is no reason to suppose that science will not one day provide a complete explanation for them. In fact, science has already been able to reveal a great many things about the neurology and physiology of various emotions.
It’s not so long ago that we did not understand even such basic bodily mechanisms as the circulatory system let alone the complexities of genetics. It is very unwise to rule out a thorough-going scientifically verifiable account of all our emotional processes, including our experiences of consciousness itself.
The basic proposition of Buddhism is that one may be able to acquire an understanding of one’s own neurology by meditation and reflection:
Theravāda promotes the concept of Vibhajjavada (Pali), literally “Teaching of Analysis.” This doctrine says that insight must come from the aspirant’s experience, application of knowledge, and critical reasoning.
This presumption is manifestly inadequate. For a whole variety of reasons – not least being the limitations of our own senses – we are unable to access the processes of our minds merely by self-observation. It seems to me that the claims of Buddhism collapse at the point of its inception.
Nevertheless, Buddhist teachings seek to generalise about the universe on the basis of (necessarily limited) human experience – that is, to speculate about the infinite on the basis of the ineffable – along these kind of lines:
Insight into the (three) characteristics or principles of existence is the (point of) entry to the Buddhist path:
Anicca (impermanence): All conditioned phenomena are subject to change, including physical characteristics, qualities, assumptions, theories, knowledge, etc. Nothing is permanent, because, for something to be permanent, there has to be an unchanging cause behind it. Since all causes are recursively bound together, there can be no ultimate unchanging cause.
Dukkha (suffering): Craving causes suffering, since what is craved is transitory, changing, and perishing. The craving for impermanent things causes disappointment and sorrow. There is a tendency to label practically everything in the world, as either “good”, “comfortable” or “satisfying”; or “bad”, “uncomfortable”, and “unsatisfying”. Labeling things in terms of like and dislike creates suffering. If one succeeds in giving up the tendency to label things, and freeing himself from the instincts that drive him towards attaining what he himself labels collectively as “liking”, he attains the ultimate freedom. The problem, the cause, the solution and the implementation, all of these are within oneself, not outside.
Anatta (not-self): all dhammas lack a fixed, unchanging ‘essence’; there is no permanent, essential Self. A living being is a composite of the five aggregates (khandhas), which is the physical forms (rupa), feelings or sensations (vedana), perception (sanna), mental formations (sankhara), and consciousness (vinnana), none of which can be identified as one’s Self. From the moment of conception, all entities (including all living beings) are subject to a process of continuous change. A practitioner should, on the other hand, develop and refine his or her mind to a state so as to see through this phenomenon. Truly understanding this counter-intuitive concept of Buddhism requires direct and personal experience.
All of this serves to offer an anthropomorphic account of nature and is both inherently insufficient and internally inconsistent.
What is all the fuss about?
67% of PBers are deities. 11% are awaiting deification. 14% are atheists or agnostics. The rest are ‘unsure’ or refuse to take the survey.
In Hinduism, an avatar /ˈævətɑr/ (Hindustani: [əʋˈt̪aːr], from Sanskrit अवतार avatāra “descent”) is a deliberate descent of a deity to Earth, or a descent of the Supreme Being (e.g., Vishnu for Vaishnavites), and is mostly translated into English as “incarnation”, but more accurately as “appearance” or “manifestation”.[1][2]
The phenomenon of an avatar [3] is observed in Hinduism, Ayyavazhi, and Sikhism. Avatar is regarded as one of the core principles of Hinduism.[4]
Peter Hartcher never fails to provide us with rubbish.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/budget-sting-eases-for-voters-poll-finds-20140622-3amd4.html
Robert Fisk on Iraq:
[If history and oil teach us anything, it’s that the collapse of Iraq shouldn’t come as surprise
You only need to go back ten years to see how this was a crisis waiting to happen]
…
[It was, as we know, about oil — the same reason for the 2003 Anglo-American invasion and the strike north by US forces to capture Mosul. If the city’s major export was – let us say – asparagus, does anyone believe the 82nd Airborne would have been sent there?]
…
[The “Levant” means Lebanon as well as Syria. And if they’re victorious in destroying Iraq and Assad of Syria, many of these young men will return “home” to Lebanon. In their thousands. Perhaps that should be our “thought for the day” as we gasp, breathless, at the news from Baghdad.]
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/if-history-and-oil-teach-us-anything-its-that-the-collapse-of-iraq-shouldnt-come-as-surprise-9555097.html
Good morning Dawn Patrollers.
Lots of wind and rain here overnight. The gutters are overflowing.
Mark Latham is all over the Royal Commission stitch up.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/mud-flung-at-bill-shorten-by-rabid-right-shows-hes-a-threat-to-coalition-20140622-zshx1.html
The Australian can stick these inconvenient facts in its pipe and smoke it!
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/plain-packaging-pushes-cigarette-sales-down-20140622-3amd8.html
The Independent Australia forensically piles in to The Australian over its Big Tobacco support.
http://www.independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/academics-and-the-australian-go-up-in-smoke,6599
Max the Axe at his duplicitous best.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydney-airport-missed-noise-targets-20140622-3amd7.html
This is hard to argue against. It should be a good 4 Corners tonight.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/david-ipp-calls-for-federal-corruption-watchdog-20140622-3amd6.html
Hartcher with his usual drivel (when it comes to Abbott. dribble!) on the latest Neilsen Poll.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/budget-sting-eases-for-voters-poll-finds-20140622-3amd4.html
A far better effort by Michael Gordon. One thing that does come from the poll is that it suggests that it’s time for Shorten to het the boots in.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/analysis-why-july-1-cannot-come-soon-enough-for-tony-abbott-20140622-zsi2i.html
And here’s Laura Tingle’s take on the poll.
http://www.afr.com/p/national/government_failure_to_sell_budget_2IUXREucFZxeQbD85SPJVN
Michelle Grattan also has a crack at it.
https://theconversation.com/government-still-failing-the-fairness-test-with-voters-28306
John Hewson hits out at Abbott’s scaremongering on climate policy.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/22/john-hewson-warns-of-scaremongering-on-climate-policy
Section 2 . . .
This organising mob would be Cory Bernardi’s friend wouldn’t it?
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/q-society-spreading-antimosque-message-in-bendigo-20140622-zshj4.html
Child care vs PPL. A big issue for Abbott.
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jun/22/childcare-costs-huge-stumbling-block-for-women-re-entering-workforce
Money may not get this “high flyer” out of the shit.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/jodhi-meares-facing-jail-over-drinkdriving-after-being-caught-in-bellevue-hill-allegedly-three-times-over-the-limit-and-driving-while-suspended/story-fnilxh2r-1226963155989
Carbon pricing favourability is growing.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/poll-finds-support-growing-for-carbon-pricing-laws-20140622-zsi40.html
A good AFR article on banking – several topics.
http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/cba_braces_for_senate_chastisement_1FmbsPKJeAeI4dnNALFAOJ
Ross Gittins on the ethics of economists.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/economists-facing-flak-over-ethics-20140622-3am9r.html
Bruce Petty hammers George Brandis.
**Fairfax is putting up hardly any of its cartoons these days**
David Rowe on the Pope excommunicating the Mafia.
http://www.afr.com/p/national/cartoon_gallery_david_rowe_1g8WHy9urgOIQrWQ0IrkdO
Amanda defends poor Tony, set up by the media, but hints at evil-doings by Julia.
The headline doesn’t describe the content correctly (surprise!).
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/a-wink-and-a-wad-and-some-double-standards-regarding-tony-abbott-and-julia-gillard-20140620-zsgvj.html
CTar1
Robert has lived in Beirut since the 1970’s so he’d be very keen not to see them arrive.
And from the Land of the Free –
Texan women open carrying assault weapons in a Target store. Simply crazy!
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2014/06/22/tell-target-open-carry-texas-male-female-shoppersopencarry/
The Yanks keep saying they have the best health care in the world. They should have a look at this.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/22/1308346/-We-have-a-crappy-healthcare-system
Mike Papantonio on the problems facing Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017198410
This Missouri church knows how to attract Southern parishioners.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/06/22/3451754/church-raffled-off-two-ar-15s-to-get-more-people-to-follow-jesus/
The Young Turks on the irony of Dick Cheney being hammered by, of all people, Megan Kelly of FoxNews.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/06/22/3451754/church-raffled-off-two-ar-15s-to-get-more-people-to-follow-jesus/
A former Bush man says the US should embrace a carbon tax to save itself.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/06/22/3451687/hank-paulson-climate-crash-carbon-tax/
lizzie
I didn’t link Vanstone this morning because it was such crap!
BK
Crap indeed! I apologise to all readers and bow to your judgement.
She couldn’t get rid of her prejudice for long enough to make a reasonable fist of the comparisons.
Some solid analysis of Neilsen from Laura Tingle
[The Nielsen poll should also give the government pause to consider the wisdom of spending an inordinate amount of time trying to cut down its opposition, instead of trying to improve its own budget sales pitch.
It is hard to believe a government that has such a bad credibility rating with voters could mount too potent an argument that the opposition is even worse, so it is not clear whether it can claim the credit for a fall in Bill Shorten’s approval rating from its immediate post-budget high. But the net approval figures for the two leaders, and the preferred prime minister figures, suggest the Coalition really has to rethink where it is devoting its energies.
Mr Abbott’s net approval is at minus 25. Mr Shorten’s is at plus one.
Mr Shorten also leads as preferred prime minister 47 per cent to 40 per cent, a lead gained after just eight months, faster – as Nielsen pollster John Stirton points out – than any previous PM with the exception of Paul Keating who started out behind.]
http://www.afr.com/p/national/government_failure_to_sell_budget_2IUXREucFZxeQbD85SPJVN
Hartcher’s piece:
Stirton argues that because the public is confident Labor, The Greens and/or PUP will save them from the worst excesses of the Budget then they feel safe giving some ground back to the Coalition.
Essentially, Stirton says, Labor, in promising to knock the harsher, rougher edges off the Budget is hurting its poll results and its re-election chances.
Ha! Ha! Labor are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
If they vote for the Budget then they’re just as nasty as the Coalition are. If they don’t, the Coalition looks better, thanks to Labor’s social conscience. The puiblic take the helping hand then vote for the government anyway.
Surely there has to be a way to get around this conundrum.
Abbott did it by outright lying and media manipulation.
The media played it down when the Coalition voted for Labor government measures, amplifying the “anti” rhetoric and simply not reporting the “waving through” later on.
For the rest, Abbott told us all about “unity tickets”, solidarity, committment, even “ownership” of the NDIS at one stage, then reneged on most of them. The media covered for him there, too.
Without the media on-side, Labor can’t either lie, as Abbott did, or have their tracks covered when they wave things through.
Gee, I guess they’ll just have to argue their case.
We may find that PUP and the Greens throw a spanner in the works, letting some things through that the Coalition, upon reflection, may have already changed their minds about.
On the other hand, the Coalition have been doing a pretty good job of shooting themselves in the foot.
It *is* a kind of irony that Hartcher is actually close to celebrating a 53-47 result, with Shorten ahead of Abbott as PPM as the cherry on top.
[It is hard to believe a government that has such a bad credibility rating with voters could mount too potent an argument that the opposition is even worse, so it is not clear whether it can claim the credit for a fall in Bill Shorten’s approval rating from its immediate post-budget high. But the net approval figures for the two leaders, and the preferred prime minister figures, suggest the Coalition really has to rethink where it is devoting its energies.]
To me it seems they are still in opposition mode when it comes to Labor.
BB
Yes part of the media campaign for the government. The media is trying to support the idea of letting the budget through.
They know they cannot spin unfair budget blocked into a positive for Abbott. The reality that it puts the budget into terminal mode and the first rewrite of a budget that I know of.
This is likely to put the Abbott government as officially the worst government Australia has had. Even Murdoch will not be able to spin that for Abbott.
[But if the repeal comes AFTER July 1 then, if it’s treated as a normal tax measure, it won’t take effect until 1 July 2015, when it was going to end anyway.]
Wasn’t that the point?
They HAD to get it through by June 30, or repealing the Carbon Tax loses a lot of its impetus.
“@QuentinDempster: Devastating: If leak to Murdoch Press of $40m-$50m ‘additional funding cut’ to ABC is correct hundreds of ABC staff now in the firing line.”
@DeborahAnnG: Rural Libs criticise Brandis over East Jerusalem remarks as ‘intellectual arrogance’. Intellectual’s a bit strong. http://t.co/XqWfqn9Aaa
Seems the cuts to ABC funds are going to be $100 million, not $50 million.
Don’t I remember someone saying “No cuts to the ABC or SBS”?
It was a bare-faced lie.
https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB8QqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fmedia%2Fbroadcast%2Fabc-hit-by-50m-of-new-cutbacks%2Fstory-fna045gd-1226963167966&ei=QVSnU5zLIsSkkQXetIDgDQ&usg=AFQjCNGFXTYN7UgSpE3e-kz62hmZOXDwrw&bvm=bv.69411363,d.dGI
Leroy @77 re Catallaxy and Sinclair Davidson’s role in penning a rationale for divestment to be seen as a brief of corporations law on the basis of ‘stigmatising’ a product …
This has been published at Catallaxy by Davidson himself:
[The anti-tobacco lobby would like us to believe that they have pursued a campaign against an industry and a product. They expressly use terms such as “stigmatisation” and “denormalisation”. But, of course, you can’t stigmatise or denormalise industries or products you can only stigmatise or denormalise people.]
Davidson here doesn’t seem to endorse corporations are people so he has already holed this line of attack below the waterline.
More broadly, were he to attempt to argue that corporations law ought to silence people from making choices about their investment conduct, he’d be subverting an important claim of right wing libertarians — that the virtue of ‘the market’ is greatest when people decide, independently of interference by the state, how to invest. It is not for the state or any corporation, in the libertarian view, to coerce investment choice.
If people invest unwisely, that is a matter for them, because they accept all of the risk. Providing that no state agency misleads them or obstructs them getting market-sensitive information, the RW libertarian can be satisfied.
briefly
thanks for your post on Buddhism, because – having discovered that ModLib had once again done the ‘failing to check sources’ thing when it came to Einstein’s quotes (or lack of them) on Buddhism, I wondered how far I should trust other statements ML had made on the subject.
BB
Labor may have, or may, ‘save’ voters from the worst of the Abbott budget, but what that means is that voters now know (i) they can’t trust anything Abbott and co say to them; (ii) yes, there are worse things than a ‘dysfunctional’ Labor government; (iii) what Abbott’s real agenda is.
As I’ve said before, the surprising thing is the improvement in Labor’s vote. At this stage of the cycle, one would expect dissaffected voters would be going to Greens/PUP/indies, rather than to the Labor party.
That suggests that many people were actually quite satisfied with the Labor government as such, despite its internal bickerings.
I remember asking my father why he’d voted for Fraser in 1975. He said wtte that the Libs weren’t going to stop wrecking things unless they were given government, so he’d voted to stop the carnage.