After a slightly surprising week of polling, in which Newspoll, Essential and Morgan all placed Labor in the range of 53% to 54% after bias adjustment, the BludgerTrack aggregate finds a bounce back to the Coalition from the abysmal depths plumbed after Australia Day. The Coalition is up by 2% on the two-party and primary vote, at the expense of the Greens as well as Labor, and by 10 on the seat projection, with three gains in Victoria, two each in New South Wales and Western Australia, and one each in Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania.
Newspoll is the only one of the three to have supplied new leadership ratings, and since no new figures emerged last week, they weigh heavily upon the model’s current readings. This might be deemed unfortunate, as some of the Newspoll numbers look a little idiosyncratic. In particular, the minus 14% net approval for Bill Shorten is his worst in any published poll since he became leader, and nine points worse than any result this year. It may be that when the dust settles, this result will show up as a correction to the anomalous recent trend in his favour, returning him to his long-term equilibrium just below zero.
Among the many interesting features of the Newspoll result was the personal rating for Tony Abbott, which all but matched the results Newspoll produced a fortnight ago from a sample that gave the Coalition such devastating numbers on voting intention. Indeed, the latest Newspoll runs a very close second to the one a fortnight ago as the worst personal result Abbott has suffered in a poll as prime minister. The trend chart shown on the sidebar to the right accordingly shows no respite in Abbott’s collapse since Australia Day, in strong contrast to voting intention.
fess
This is article in Oz on 13th feb re submarines
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/index.html?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&mode=premium&dest=http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/sinking-feeling-for-pm-under-fire/story-fnfenwor-1227217765671&memtype=anonymous
Here you go, dtt —
[there is no word for “blue” in ancient Greek.]
[…The conspicuous absence of blue is not limited to the Greeks. The color “blue” appears not once in the New Testament, and its appearance in the Torah is questioned (there are two words argued to be types of blue, sappir and tekeleth, but the latter appears to be arguably purple, and neither color is used, for instance, to describe the sky). Ancient Japanese used the same word for blue and green..]
http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/hoffman_01_13/
However, not having a word for ‘blue’ doesn’t mean they saw blue as white —
[This suggests the possibility that not only did Homer lack a word for what we know as “blue”—he might never have perceived the color itself. To him, the sky really was bronze, and the sea really was the same color as wine..]
So while it’s true they had no word for blue, they used other colours (not white) instead.
daretotread@2146
I discussed respondent allocated preferences v previous election with William before the Qld election.
It has to be much trickier with optional preferential where voters can allow preferences to exhaust as a ‘pox on both your houses’ protest such as could be expected at both the last Qld and NSW state elections.
Also, even voters who did not allow preferences to exhaust may be expected to swing back from a previous protest preference.
I doubt the preference flows from the last NSW election will be much of a guide in this one. Just like Qld.
DTT, my own view is that the issues are largely specific to optional preferential voting. If Greens voters are forced to choose between Labor and the Coalition, they are highly stable in breaking four-to-one Labor’s way. But if you give them the further option of favouring neither, they will be prone to exercise it against a Labor government that’s been in office a long time. But it will be a different story after three years of Campbell Newman. Going back to 2001 though, it did appear that the exhausted preference rate had become fairly stable in the 60%-70% range. So it was a big surprise to see it drop into the forties.
The other qualification I should add is that preferences will become unstable when the minor party mix changes. Labor did slightly better at the federal election than polls suggested because Palmer United came along and bagged 5% of the vote, and their preferences were less unfavourable to Labor than those of other non-Greens minor parties had been. If a One Nation came along tomorrow and scooped up 10% of the vote, as it did in 1998, pollsters would have a real problem. But the whole debate about previous-election versus respondent-allocated preferences didn’t really come along until later.
Yet another thing I should acknowledge is that even under compulsory preferential voting in Victoria, Labor did improve its Greens preference share somewhat at the election in November, causing it to slightly outperform previous-election 2PP projections. The different wasn’t huge, but it wasn’t insignificant either.
victoria:
That link doesn’t work, and nor does the Google trick for some reason.
2 things.
1. Re BB’s 2137 comment about Insiders
Ms fredex was watching ABC 24 on the day of the 61:39 vote for nobody and I wandered into the TV room shortly after Phil had announced the numbers just in time to hear Cassidy say that he was predicting an overt challenge from Turnbull the next day.
Blather.
2. Re NBN
You may recall I’m a little unhappy that my hopes were raised by seeing a NBN pole go up across the river 7 months ago only to be still waiting for something to happen.
I just had a visit from some locals.
This is an ultra safe Liberal electorate, the polling booth in the town concerned gave the Libs a 80:20 2PP in 2013.
But my visitors from there say people are not happy.
Like me they are fed up looking at the pole but getting stonewalled by NBN Co whenever they ask when is something actually going to happen.
I think Mal may have made a mistake.
Putting up the pole raised expectations and with nothing happening – the latest ‘word’, FWIW, is ‘maybe June’ – apparently people are pissed off.
The carrot is being dangled in front of the noses but they can’t touch it.
lizzie
On that dress. The original is blue and black and when held against a wall and the photo taken with canera lights it appears white and gold.
I know this because the BBC showed how it happens live on camera.
When I see ohoto I see white and gold but have no doubt the dress is actually black and blue.
It was after that report was aired I noticed twitter moved on
confessions@2155
Try googling “Sinking feeling for PM under fire”
One issue at the Qld election was the “Put the LNP last” campaign run by PS Unions. This may have induced more people to fill out the entire ballot paper so they could put Newman last?
I see a similar campaign is being run in NSW.
Reckon there needs to be a circuit breaker, agree that the coalition has lived on the media picking up the perception of dysfunction with Labor and will not throw it away. There needs to be a huge drop in the polls or a loss in NSW for the coalition. Abbott is all about Abbott nothing less nothing more. There was a comment on insiders that I agree Abbott knows how to play to his base but nothing else. The policy’s of Gonski, NDIS, Carbon Pricing are all investments in the future of this country within a sound financial investment this is something that is beyond the coalition they can not think beyond the individual and do not believe in a concept called society ie there are others beside the individual.
I agree BB insiders added very little value, after the interview they could have discussed the policy topics touched in , e.g. Financial investment, given Turnbull’s background I would be interested to know his opinion on FoFA and the recommendation re a RC into financial planning.
I have been doing some more reading on US sites re net neutrality, a lot of people think the requirement for all net traffic to be treated equally impacts people’s freedom and will stifle innovation.
Verizon (think a cross between Telstra and Foxtel), updated their policy page with this:
http://publicpolicy.verizon.com/blog/entry/fccs-throwback-thursday-move-imposes-1930s-rules-on-the-internet
I remind people of Paul Bongiourno’s tweet.
I agree with him. Labor had the advantage of someone having the guts to challenge. The LMP does not.
The damage of Abbott staying in there and the leadership circus continuing week after week is permanent damage to the party.
Voters will be thinking they could not organise a chook raffle
Yes, I very much think the “put the LNP last” campaign was the unsung hero of Labor’s win in Queensland. I tend to think the effect won’t be as great in New South Wales, both because the Coalition is more moderate there, and Labor is smellier. But we’ll see.
Fess
Does this link work
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/sinking-feeling-for-pm-under-fire/story-fnfenwor-1227217765671
Photo to me looked white/light blue and gold/grey until I loaded the pic in an editor and used the colour dropper to display the colours seperately. Could see then that the blue was actually much deeper than it appeared in the photo. Brain seems to have accepted that evidence and I now see it as blue and gold/grey
The Money Quote fron Richardson.
[I wrote in this column months ago that to get the free trade agreement with Japan over the line, Abbott gave his counterpart Shinzo Abe a shake-of-the-hands undertaking to buy Japanese submarines.
On Monday, Abbott said there had been no secret deals. I am reliably — very reliably — informed there are documents in existence that will disprove this. Whether they are revealed by leak or Freedom of Information ferreting, this would be the end of Abbott’s prime ministership — it would be a broken promise too far and one denial too many. I am not sure who is the bigger mug — Abbott for promising the tender or Edwards for believing him. Forty-three votes would have looked a great deal worse than 39.]
vic:
No, but that’s okay, I’ve got the gist of it from elsewhere. Ta.
guytaur
A factor could be the camera setting re type light source/colour temperature. Different light sources can cause very noticeable colour shifts. The camera can adjust automatically for it but if it was a manual set to say “sunset” and the lights were fluorescent I’d imagine quite odd colour shifts.
Here is a table of the shifts from various light sources.
Also re accessing articles on the Australian, once you have tried to access an article and gotten the subscription page, a cookie is stored in your browser and will prevent you from accessing it even from Google
Try another browser or clear your cookies, or use incognito mode.
here is whole article
THIS column is usually written on Thursday morning and I always read The Australian before I begin. I have just read the columns by Niki Savva and Greg Sheridan.
Two things sprang immediately to mind.
First, they write brilliantly, but all of you know that already. Second, when two people from the Right of our nation’s politics can each write two columns in two weeks belting Tony Abbott, you know he is in deep trouble.
Last week Savva used the phrase “breakdown of trust from the top to the bottom of the Abbott government”. This week she chronicled the blast a hapless but courageous Wyatt Roy received when he dared to tell the Prime Minister that an apology (a la Peter Beattie) to the nation for breaking promises should be forthcoming.
The youngest MP was blasted by the highest for even suggesting any promise had been broken. When you add this to the phrase “verbal gymnastics”, used by another backbencher, Craig Laundy, when describing the same phenomenon in the partyroom, you come to understand how the spill motion, in the absence of a candidate, could get 40 per cent of the vote. Sadly, our Prime Minister is heavily into self-delusion. He believes in his own perfection.
He believes that, along with the Pope, he has been divinely invested with infallibility. When you are that good it is impossible to be a liar or to break promises; this is the real explanation for why it has taken so long for the PM to utter a syllable of contrition to a nation well aware of his failures.
Abbott is addicted to his belief in his own perfection so much that, like other addicts, he can’t admit to the basic problem and thus can’t take remedial action. Now his mates are readying themselves to do some remedying of their own.
Monday’s vote was extraordinary. For a party with no culture or predilection for dumping sitting prime ministers who have recently led it to an emphatic victory, it is difficult to believe that the vote could have occurred at all, let alone attracted 39 votes.
Add to that the fact Malcolm Turnbull never declared his candidacy and it is all the more amazing. Turnbull played his hand really, really well. He made the allegation of disloyalty easy to make and impossible to prove. The revolt was led by the powerless who were sick and tired of receiving the mushroom treatment from the powerful. Previously unheard backbenchers were getting front-page coverage.
Some were embittered by Abbott’s failure to reorganise their particular talents with appropriate promotion to the ministry, but most of them were simply frustrated at the direction of the government. They all characterised that direction as one headed straight for a cliff with a long drop to destruction.
It is always difficult to harshly criticise someone you have never met or by whom you have never been hurt. But it’s impossible to ignore the awful carnage Peta Credlin is doing to her boss. She is such a hated figure now in the Liberal Party that rehabilitation is simply not possible. Rupert Murdoch was right to say she should go, though his intervention made the right solution for an embattled PM impossible to implement. Credlin must go and she must go now — Murdoch or no Murdoch. Her position is now totally untenable.
If Abbott wants to survive he has to forget about his loyalty to his chief of staff and tell her to write the resignation letter — I’m sure she wants to spend more time with her family, and the time should be made available.
You would have been entitled to believe Abbott would have learned how difficult it can be to extricate yourself from the anger of the aggrieved when you break your solemn promises; in trying to win a ballot in his partyroom he delivered another broken promise. This is one genie he will not be able to put back in the bottle.
The worst kept secret in the government has been the extreme discomfort of its South Australian contingent over the future of ASC in Adelaide. Labor made the prospect of submarines a state issue in two recent by-elections and achieved remarkable results. The Libs are terrified of the federal ramifications if this farce is allowed to continue.
So it was not too big a surprise when backbench SA senator Sean Edwards told Abbott he would not vote against the spill unless he received an assurance that a full, competitive tender would be issued on the subs — at least giving Adelaide the chance of some much-needed employment opportunities. There is no doubt that given four SA votes were on the line in a tight ballot, a desperate PM gave that assurance.
As soon as the ballot was over, the backflip began. The weasel words flowed. We will have an evaluation rather than a tender because the Japanese believe they have the promise to get a nod without a competitive tender.
I wrote in this column months ago that to get the free trade agreement with Japan over the line, Abbott gave his counterpart Shinzo Abe a shake-of-the-hands undertaking to buy Japanese submarines.
On Monday, Abbott said there had been no secret deals. I am reliably — very reliably — informed there are documents in existence that will disprove this. Whether they are revealed by leak or Freedom of Information ferreting, this would be the end of Abbott’s prime ministership — it would be a broken promise too far and one denial too many. I am not sure who is the bigger mug — Abbott for promising the tender or Edwards for believing him. Forty-three votes would have looked a great deal worse than 39.
Sheridan may be right when he says the submarines will now probably have to be built in this country. His hope that the Prime Minister is the one to deliver them is open to much doubt. I am not sure if the Pope is infallible but I’m bloody certain Abbott isn’t.
my post at 2170 was for fess, apologies for taking up so much space.
Anyhoo talk later. Off to dinner
poroti
The BBC reporter held the dress up to camera at ground level it was black and blue. Then he moved it up onto the wall with the camera lights in place and no adjustment on the BBC Camera.
The dress on the wall looked white and gold.
The BBC were using the original dress as they also interviewed the woman who posted the photo in the first place
[
TrueBlueAussie
Posted Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:51 pm | Permalink
frednk,
Terrible example. My income is net positive. The budgets under Labor are always net negative because they spend like drunken sailors.
A better example would be that I pay for all my weekly groceries, electricity and everything on Credit Card because I don’t make enough income per week to pay for my expenses.
Those on Labors side think this is sustainable and I totally disagree.
]
Because TrueBlueAussie (and considering your values; I think having Aussie in your handle insults us all) government doesn’t build one house; it builds one and then another and then another. It is always creating assets; but you seem to belong to that small set of people that don’t seem to be able to accept that roads, schools and hospitals are assets.
Thanks vic.
[Labor had the advantage of someone having the guts to challenge.]
And a woman too.
Shame job on the Lib men.
🙁
JM
I don’t see what being a woman has to do with it.
Because TrueBlueAussie (and considering your values; I think having Aussie in your handle insults us all) government doesn’t build one house; it builds one and then another and then another. It is always creating assets; but you seem to belong to that small set of people that don’t seem to be able to accept that roads, schools and hospitals are assets.
The Ancient Greek (transliterated) words kyanos , glaukos, are types of blu; amyethystinos, ianthinos and pelidnos are also close to blue. The distinction between blue and purple is pretty subjective. (I had to really struggle with the auto-correct!!)
@smh: Comment: @TonyAbbottMHR has thrown everything overboard in his treatment of Gillian Triggs. http://t.co/gotwTzGJQo | @CCWaterstreet
[JM
I don’t see what being a woman has to do with it.]
I was throwing their bogus big tough he-man act back in their faces.
I couldn’t give a rat’s about the gender of a politician, or doctor, or plumber…
guytaur@2176
It doesn’t, but some see the world through gender spectacles.
I remember seeing a a documentary that the ancients didn’t have a word for ‘blue’. They regarded it as a shade of green. Apart from the sky and its reflection, blue is relatively uncommon in nature (in plants, minerals, soil, animals) – far less than reds, yellows, greens. As for the sky, a clear sky might have been regarded as a void, as did members of a tribe of Bushmen (?) featured in that documentary.
The colour ‘orange’ is a relatively recent addition to English. It was originally lumped with red. That’s why people with orange hair are called ‘redheads’.
JM
Tanks for clarifying. 🙂
Mmmmm…
[It has been proposed that the word glaucoma originates from the ancient Greek word ΓλαύVξ – ΓλαύVκος (glaukos) a noun and adjective originating from the verb ‘ΓλαύVσσω’ (glausso), meaning “to glow” or “to shine”. The adjective describes someone who or something that glows or shines, this perhaps relating to the “hot” eye with acute glaucoma. However, with respect to colour, the ancient word also represents “blue‐white” or “blue‐green” and in the case of eyes it is thought to represent eyes having the light‐blue or sea‐green hue attributable to corneal oedema/opacification or cataract.]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2095442/
As usual at times of intense leadership speculation, there is much talk of the use by journalists of unnamed sources. Andrew Bolt was banging on about it today as was Bushfire Bill.
The question really has to be turned around. To any of these critics of this style of journalism, ask yourselves this: If you were responsible for reporting on events and Canberra, what would you do? What would you do if backbencher after backbencher, speaking on condition of anonymity told you Abbott was finished, it was just a matter of figuring out the when, how and who. And then a couple of Cabinet minister, also speaking on condition of anonymity approach you and say much the same.
Are you supposed to disregard this information? Tell them to go away? By the very nature of what’s unfolding, these people will rarely be prepared to be named publicly. On the other hand, if journalists simply ignored all this stuff, then their reporting of events in Canberra would, by definition, be less well-informed.
Any reader is intelligent enough to take an unnamed source for what it is – an MP or Cabinet minister unwilling to put his or her name to talk over the leadership. It is also undoubtedly true that when a significant number of unnamed sources corroborate one another, that too becomes more credible by the very weight of numbers.
I’ll bet if a newspaper started up tomorrow pledging that they would not report any material from unnamed sources, that newspaper would do very poorly indeed.
The other point I intended to make: The politicians involved know that this stuff is true because they’re in the thick of it, very often the ones providing the information. And of course, over time, certain journalists gain more credibility than others for presenting unsourced material in a way that proves accurate.
alias, I suppose the journalists could do what they could to determine the veracity of statements from sources to remain identified. Statements of questionable accuracy from unidentified sources shouldn’t be published.
[The politicians involved know that this stuff is true because they’re in the thick of it, very often the ones providing the information.]
Or alternatively, they could have something to gain from feeding inaccurate information.
guytaur
If the wall was the dominant part of what the cameral was “seeing” then it may well make an adjustment based on the reflected light from the wall.
People with cameras would likely have seen that shaded areas on a bright sunny day sometimes have quite a colour shift or vice versa. The camera may auto select “shade /cloudy” or “bright sunlight” depending on the settings and composition.
A further complication is that people’s computer screens would also vary hugely in their settings. This alone means lots of different tones.
Then of course there must be a variation in people re the colour receptors in the eye. There must have been some adaptation re better perception of different colours depending on where the people live ,arctic , forest , desert etc.
[Subjectivity of color perception
The Himba people have been found to categorize colors differently from most Euro-Americans and are able to easily distinguish close shades of green, barely discernable for most people.
Perception of color depends heavily on the context in which the perceived object is presented. For example, a white page under blue, pink, or purple light will reflect mostly blue, pink, or purple light to the eye, respectively; the brain, however, compensates for the effect of lighting (based on the color shift of surrounding objects) and is more likely to interpret the page as white under all three conditions, a phenomenon known as color constancy.]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision
Talking of unnamed sources, I find this by Brandis amusing. ‘Dozens of members of the government’???? I suppose if you’re going to fabricate evidence, you might as well push the boat right out. None of these fools are believable now.
[Brandis said he received numerous texts and visits from dozens of members of the government who expressed that Triggs had “fatally compromised” her position as human rights commissioner.]
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/charles-waterstreet-pm-has-thrown-everything-overboard-in-his-treatment-of-gillian-triggs-20150228-13r7tt.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nc&eid=socialn:twi-13omn1677-edtrl-other:nnn-17/02/2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o&sa=D&usg=ALhdy28zsr6qiq
TBA – The previous Labor Government did waste money – on Howard-initiated middle class welfare, although it made a start on winding it back. But there’s more to do: the private health insurance rebate, handouts to wealthy private schools, over-generous support for well off retirees, negative gearing, capital gains tax discount. I have nothing against people being rich and/or doing well from investment – good luck to them, they don’t need concessions and subsidies.
Bishop been talking to Richo?
7news reachtel
47 -53
10 point jump in Labor primary vote/
Also Abbott factor means 46% less likely o vote for Baird
[Brandis said he received numerous texts and visits from dozens of members of the government who expressed that Triggs had “fatally compromised” her position as human rights commissioner.]
Yet, apparently at the party room meeting government members saw Rabbott’s handling of the report as a missed opportunity.
Ah Ghost quick tonight
“@GhostWhoVotes: #ReachTEL Poll NSW State 2 Party Preferred: L/NP 53 ALP 47
#nswvotes #auspol”
https://www.reachtel.com.au/blog/7-news-newsouthwales-poll-26february2015
Fully 46.8% of NSW voters are less likely to vote for Baird because of the Abbott factor
guytaur
[10 point jump in Labor primary vote/
Also Abbott factor means 46% less likely o vote for Baird]
That is exactly what happened in Queensland.
[Those on Labors side think this is sustainable and I totally disagree.]
TBA is advocating raising taxes on the wealthy I see.
What a pinko lefty socialist he/she/it is.
[Fully 46.8% of NSW voters are less likely to vote for Baird because of the Abbott factor]
Wonder if this will decrease as the polling date draws closer.
Under the heading ‘Labor’s debt bomb set to swallow us all’, Samantha Maiden in Adelaide’s Sunday Mail tells us Joe Hockey’s intergenerational report, to be released on Thursday, “has delivered a stunning warning to Labor, the Senate and voters on the huge challenges the nation faces if political leaders fail to act”.
Under Labor’s current budget settings, net debt would represent a 50 per cent share of the nation’s entire economy within 20 years, she says.
She repeats PriceWaterhouseCoopers modelling which suggests debt is on track to reach $1 trillion by 2037, even if savings stalled by the Senate are factored in.
What she doesn’t say, but Peter Martin has pointed out in The Age, is that Australia’s economy is on trend to turn over about $6.5 trillion a year by 2037 compared with $1.6 trillion today. Our current debt of 16.7 per cent of GDP would reduce to 15.3 per cent of GDP on those figures.
But don’t worry about the facts. Stand by for a gigantic scare campaign.