ReachTEL: 50-50

Movement in the Coalition’s favour on the primary vote from ReachTEL, but their enthusiasm will be tempered by an alarming result from the South Australian seat of Grey, where Rowan Ramsey is under the pump from the Nick Xenophon Team.

ReachTEL has produced another lineball result on two-party preferred for the Seven Network, which stays at 50-50 after moving from 52-48 in Labor’s favour the week before. However, the poll offers some encouragement for the Coalition in having them up and Labor down on the primary vote for the second week in a row, and the two-party result would have rounded to 52-48 in their favour if 2013 election preference flows were applied, as ReachTEL did until quite recently. Labor was able to retain parity in the headline result through a still greater flow of respondent-allocated minor party and independent preferences, which already looked stronger than plausible.

Labor did particularly poorly this week (and to a lesser extent last week) on the forced response follow-up question for the undecided, on which they failed to crack 20%. With the result of the follow-up question integrated into the total, the primary votes are 42.7% for the Coalition (up 1.2%), 33.2% for Labor (down 1.7%), 9.9% for the Greens (down 0.2%) and 4.5% for the Nick Xenophon Team (down 0.5%). On personal ratings, Malcolm Turnbull’s combined very good and good rating is up from 26.3% to 28.3%, and poor plus very poor is down from 40.8% to 37.4%. Shorten is down on both measures, from 29.0% to 27.5% on the former and 39.6% to 38.6% on the latter, and Turnbull’s lead on preferred prime minister is effectively unchanged, down from 55.6-44.4 to 55.4-44.6. The automated phone poll was conducted last night from a sample of 2175, which is on the low side by ReachTEL’s standards.

Of perhaps even greater interest than the national result is the regular weekly supplementary marginal seat poll, which credits the Andrea Broadfoot of the Nick Xenophon Team with a 54-46 two-party lead over Liberal member Rowan Ramsay in the electorate of Grey, which covers South Australia’s “iron triangle” of Whyalla, Port Augusta and Port Pirie, together with the state’s remote areas. Inclusive of the forced preference results, the primary votes are Liberal 39.4%, Nick Xenophon Team 32.7%, Labor 14.5% and Greens 5.5%, with around three-quarters of preferences flowing to Broadfoot. The poll was conducted last night from a sample of 665.

UPDATE: BludgerTrack updated with the ReachTEL result below. As BludgerTrack is going off 2013 election preferences, it’s treating this poll as being close to 52-48 in the Coalition’s favour, and there has accordingly been a significant shift in that direction on two-party preferred. However, it’s only yielded one extra seat on the seat projection because of some fairly substantial changes in the state-level results. This is because I’ve only just now added the state results for the last two ReachTEL polls, because their new practice of reporting undecided results presented an accounting difficulty that I’ve only now attended to. The inclusion of these numbers has makes little difference in New South Wales, pares the Coalition back in Queensland, and inflates them in the other four states. In seat terms, this knocks three off their tally in Queensland, and adds two in Western Australia (corrected what looked like an excessive result there earlier) and one each in Victoria and Tasmania.

bludgertrack-2016-06-10

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

830 comments on “ReachTEL: 50-50”

Comments Page 4 of 17
1 3 4 5 17
  1. That question in Reachtel on company tax vs health and education spending is the big one imho. If I was Labor, I would be framing the last three weeks in exactly this way, every single chance I got; every ad, every media grab, all the way to election day. I think the last couple of weeks of campaigning have been played out on the Coalition’s terms, and that current poling is reflecting this. That needs to end from today, and I suspect it will. The primary numbers in Reachtel aren’t good for Labor; but this is far from over.

  2. Jackol

    So you’ve no evidence that there is anything happening, it’s just the vibe…

    Empire building happens. People form false beliefs and cling to them fiercely. People become paranoid about something and don’t trust anyone who tries to tell them otherwise. People don’t want to back down from a position because they think it makes them look weak….etc, etc, etc.

    There are about a million reasons why you can reason with people and not convince them of something, even if that something is to their benefit (and we’ve just been talking, on this thread, of people who vote Coalition when it’s against their own best interests).

    But hey, despite having absolutely no evidence to support what you say, you obviously are unshaken in your belief that something dodgy is going on. You may be right – but if we’re talking Occam’s razor, if there’s no evidence of something dodgy going on other than your own deep dark suspicion, then the simplest explanation is that there isn’t.

  3. WWP
    Do you remember any Liberal Ministers resigning over Abbott’s changes to boards? When your own side abandons you, you are fucked.

  4. As a non-Laborite who has been fairly well impressed by Andrews this past year, I’m perplexed by this who CFA impasse. I’m more inclined to side with Jane Garrett on this.

    If there’s a restructure, first of all the metropolitan CFA branches should be placed under MFB control and the crew be allowed to decide to transfer to MFB or be reassigned to newer CFA branches in the country.

  5. I am blind.

    The NXT candidate is on the bottom of the ticket in Port Adelaide and on the top in Sturt, and my eyes merged them.

    That’s my excuse and I’m sticking to it 😉

  6. Why have two Victorian Government ministers resigned on principle if the CFA’s claims have no merit? A clear picture is emerging: a Premier who is beholden to a particular stakeholder, hidebound, and unwilling to govern in a deliberative, consultative, and civic-minded manner.

  7. I tried to post this, this morning over my coffee, but Crikey wasn’t playing nice, but I think I saw a reference to Antony Green saying that the risk with any senate voting ‘tactic’ was that you didn’t know what other people were doing?
    If I read that right it is a little bit odd that under the old system Antony and many many others inaccurately (very very inaccurately) described exactly the same issue (ie you don’t know how everyone else is voting) as a lottery, as something random, when of course under either the old system or the new system there is no randomness, no lottery, simply you don’t know what every single voter is doing. The main difference between the old and new system is it is much much harder for those not wanting a Lib / Lab / Green candidate at all to get someone different. Yeah the changes limit dissent and choice, limit democracy, but there were a whole bunch of clowns claiming it worked the other way.

  8. [WWP
    Do you remember any Liberal Ministers resigning over Abbott’s changes to boards? When your own side abandons you, you are fucked.]

    Really that is your test? Goodness gracious me no wonder we elected Abbott as PM.

  9. [As a non-Laborite who has been fairly well impressed by Andrews this past year, I’m perplexed by this who CFA impasse. I’m more inclined to side with Jane Garrett on this.

    If there’s a restructure, first of all the metropolitan CFA branches should be placed under MFB control and the crew be allowed to decide to transfer to MFB or be reassigned to newer CFA branches in the country.
    ]

    So there are vested interests in a pissing contest but you assume one side is pure. I’m watching from a long long way away but the reaction to this seems ‘simplistic’ in the nastiest possible sense.

  10. Zoomster –

    But hey, despite having absolutely no evidence to support what you say, you obviously are unshaken in your belief that something dodgy is going on.
    </blockquote.
    "No evidence" – I'm going off the government behaviour, which I find unquestionably smelly. Issuing ultimatums, ignoring the court process, failing to explain what is going on properly, making up excuses – that quote from the recently minted emergency services minister trying to justify their actions by saying, effectively "the CFA stink, some anonymous volunteers have wanted change, plus they won't do what we want them to". It's not the behaviour of a considered responsible government acting in a careful manner in relation to what is clearly a sensitive matter.

    The process stinks, the politics stinks.

  11. it is a little bit odd that under the old system Antony and many many others inaccurately (very very inaccurately) described exactly the same issue (ie you don’t know how everyone else is voting) as a lottery, as something random, when of course under either the old system or the new system there is no randomness, no lottery, simply you don’t know what every single voter is doing.

    Do you really want to accuse Antony Green, one of Australia’s foremost electoral system experts with an impeccable record of impartiality and rigour, of mischaracterizing the old Senate voting system? Your rants on this issue boiled down do your bizarre belief that there was something sacrosanct and holyabout parties doing weird, non-intuitive group ticket voting deals with each other that resulted in outcomes that most of their voters would never have knowingly endorsed.

  12. WWP
    As Nicholas says, why have two Labor ministers resigned over it if the problem isn’t real? Is the Labor Emergency Services Minister, who knows more about this than any of us, so hopeless she resigned for nothing? Of course not. Before he was elected, the single biggest complaint about Andrews was that just a puppet who would dance to his masters tune. They were right.

  13. NXT lower house PV’s in this election seem to come from 2 sources:
    1. Voted Lib, Labor, or “other” in 2013 & would vote the same in 2016 in absence of an NXT candidate;
    2. Voted Lib in 2013 & would vote Labor in 2016 in absence of an NXT candidates.
    It is category 2. that seems to be measuring 10% in Grey right now, so we seem to have a number here for the percentage of voters availing themselves of NXTethadone to ditch the Coalition for Labor!

  14. [Do you really want to accuse Antony Green, one of Australia’s foremost electoral system experts with an impeccable record of impartiality and rigour, of mischaracterizing the old Senate voting system? Your rants on this issue boiled down do your bizarre belief that there was something sacrosanct and holyabout parties doing weird, non-intuitive group ticket voting deals with each other that resulted in outcomes that most of their voters would never have knowingly endorsed.]

    Well for one I do not consider Antony god, he is not, IMHO infallible, rather he is an expert in some relevant areas of elections. That you need to resort to his unquestionable deity, lacking actual logical rational arguments is very very telling, but on the whole you are much better are regurgitating massive reams of others thoughts without critical analysis than you are of any significant degree of understanding.
    And yes I think that almost everyone involved in the OPV propaganda misrepresented the old electoral system. Antony definitely avoided many of the potholes other mere mortals dived into, but on this randomness issue, my memory is he quoted quite specific examples of how you’d need to know how others voted to within a small voting margin of like 12 votes as evidence the old system was random.
    There was nothing at all in any of my rants about there being anything even ‘good’ about group voting tickets, just on the whole they, after the really poor arguments the OPV disciples (well disciples are a lot more intelligent than most OPV evangelists but I’m lost for other words) the replacement seemed worse rather than better.
    What is really telling is your comment that:
    [ non-intuitive group ticket voting deals with each other that resulted in outcomes that most of their voters would never have knowingly endorsed.]
    You assumed that people were dumb and didn’t have a clue what they were doing, that was the essence, the very core of the OPV evangelism, but the whole OPV club failed to even admit this, nor did they seem aware that the new system made it harder no easier for idiots to express a view.

    Thank you indeed for posting tonight, just underlines how very very weak your case is.

  15. has anyoone seen/heard a labor ad??? i dont watch much television but still …

    negative ads? turnbull??? econmics? character?

  16. [WWP
    As Nicholas says, why have two Labor ministers resigned over it if the problem isn’t real? Is the Labor Emergency Services Minister, who knows more about this than any of us, so hopeless she resigned for nothing? Of course not. Before he was elected, the single biggest complaint about Andrews was that just a puppet who would dance to his masters tune. They were right.]

    Really so that there was no one, including the current PM, in Abbott’s cabinet with a spine and individual view they were prepared to defend, and there are different views within Andrew’s cabinet and that both sides have the integrity to defend and suffer personal loss to defend is the key turning point.

    That is ridiculous, you are endorsing cowardice and silence as the proper response. You are elevating talking points, and blind obedience above thought and principal.

    I honestly have no idea whether Andrews or his resigned Ministers are in the right. But I would much rather live in a world where people had principles and stood by them, than the world you so obviously endorse of mindless, brainless obedience to the party line no matter how ridiculous it is.

  17. i dont think bill gets angry enough – sincerely. he diesn’t comunicate the risks at present in this country by liberals – this is a very important election but he doesn’t make on feel that ….

  18. You assumed that people were dumb and didn’t have a clue what they were doing

    Are you saying that Labor voters could be expected to know that their votes would help a regressive Family First Senator to be elected?
    That’s the kind of absurdity that has happened several times in the past fifteen years because of group-ticket voting.
    The new system abolishes group-ticket voting and replaces it with active and deliberate choices by voters. This is obviously more democratic than the old system.

  19. WWP
    I’m endorsing the people who resigned. They are the good guys in this. They have shown who is in the right.
    The Liberals should have people like Garrett.

  20. There have been ALP on pay TV about Malcolm being out of touch.

    There have been teacher fed ads, union ads, GP ads … all saying directly or indirectly ‘Don’t vote Lib’

    I think they are holding fire until this last few weeks when people start to engage (hope so, at least).

  21. has anyoone seen/heard a labor ad??? i dont watch much television but stil

    Don’t watch TV (I YouTube, Netflix etc. for video entertainment) I have seen occasional banner ads from Labor when I go to Poll Bludger but nothing from any other party.

    There were a couple of “TERRORISTS!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!1!” Australian Government ads (can’t remember if skippable or not) at the beginning of YouTube videos I have watched recently. Does that count?

  22. Geoffrey
    Friday, June 10, 2016 at 11:14 pm
    i dont think bill gets angry enough – sincerely. he diesn’t comunicate the risks at present in this country by liberals – this is a very important election but he doesn’t make on feel that ….
    _————————————–
    Like Mark Latham? That really worked a treat!

  23. Except for a few innocuous ads in the first week of the campaign, I haven’t seen any ads on TV from either side.

  24. this is a very important election but he doesn’t make on feel that

    I think if you asked the electors, they would say this is the least important election in living memory, hence the snail-like pace the polls are moving. The electorate hasn’t engaged yet and I’m guessing they won’t til the last week, if at all.

  25. I’m in Hindmarsh, and Georganas just didn’t have the budget to take on Matt Williams at the last Election, billboards, vacant intersections etc were plastered with Liberal signage. They haven’t gone as hard this election, obviously spreading their campaign funds further. Any opposition to Labor’s same sex marriage plans within the sizeable Hindmarsh Greek community would be well and truly cancelled out by Georganas’s high standing and profile within aforementioned community. Daniel Kirk the NXT candidate a running a fairly low profile campaign, but is known to many particularly around the Glenelg area due to him being a former player for The local SANFL team.

  26. Bushfire..

    Here’s an update to your numbered report on the Hornsby police shooting:

    “Update: A NSW Health spokeswoman has denied Mr Sourian had threatened to harm police or that a consulting psychologist overruled advice not to allow day release.

    “All treatment decisions were made by the patient’s treating psychiatrist and the decision for him to be allowed an hour’s leave with his family in the grounds of the hospital was made by that psychiatrist in consultation with the family,” the spokeswoman said.

    ..cheers..

  27. markjs
    The family must feel terrible as well if they agreed to supervise him for a single hour outside the ward and this ended up happening. He must have been desperately unwell.

  28. I’m in Hindmarsh, and Georganas just didn’t have the budget to take on Matt Williams at the last Election

    Yeah, when Rudd essentially used the election kick-off speech to beg for donations, I knew that money was going to be very tight for that election!

  29. Diogenes
    Saturday, June 11, 2016 at 12:00 am
    this is a very important election but he doesn’t make on feel that

    I think if you asked the electors, they would say this is the least important election in living memory, hence the snail-like pace the polls are moving. The electorate hasn’t engaged yet and I’m guessing they won’t til the last week, if at all.

    ————- sorry to worry but its getting late
    labor (and bill) need to have passion, fire in the belly – tell people why it is important, and what’s wrong with malcolm – i worry we pay a price for having bill … he still seems disconnected, observing some process rather that fighting — this is not workplace negotiation …. i think folk here agree, this is a very important election. the libs have shown their colours

  30. diogenes
    that is problem malcolm has made politics boring … plays to LCD in different way to abbott … he promised discourse but of course wont even debate – shorten should have jumped up and down when malcolm refused to attend brisbane – not gone along with the stupid facebook idea – basically shorten is being defensive and cautious, and not capturing public attention in way needed …. plus we need ads – i can say all this because am not full timer running show ……

  31. wewantpaul @ #159 Friday, June 10, 2016 at 10:54 pm

    As a non-Laborite who has been fairly well impressed by Andrews this past year, I’m perplexed by this who CFA impasse. I’m more inclined to side with Jane Garrett on this.
    If there’s a restructure, first of all the metropolitan CFA branches should be placed under MFB control and the crew be allowed to decide to transfer to MFB or be reassigned to newer CFA branches in the country.

    So there are vested interests in a pissing contest but you assume one side is pure. I’m watching from a long long way away but the reaction to this seems ‘simplistic’ in the nastiest possible sense.

    I’ve never implied that any side is pure, but I believe the volunteer fireys should have as much a say and the salaried ones.

    There are many CFA branches in rural Victoria that has a core staff of mostly volunteer fireys, which could not possibly function without them.

  32. Spending by private citizens is constrained by the sources of available funds, including income from all sources, asset sales and borrowings from external parties. Federal government spending, however, is largely facilitated by the government issuing cheques drawn on the central bank (see
    also the discussion of Figure 8.2, below). The arrangements the government
    has with its central bank to account for this are largely irrelevant.
    When the recipients of the cheques (sellers of goods and services to the government) deposit the cheques in their bank, the cheques clear through the
    central banks clearing balances (reserves), and credit entries appear in
    accounts throughout the commercial banking system. In other words,
    government spends simply by crediting a private sector bank account at the
    central bank. Operationally, this process is independent of any prior
    revenue, including taxing and borrowing. Nor does the account crediting in
    any way reduce or otherwise diminish any government asset or government’s
    ability to further spend.
    Alternatively, when taxation is paid by private sector cheques (or bank
    transfers) that are drawn on private accounts in the member banks, the
    central bank debits a private sector bank account. No real resources are
    transferred to government. Nor is government’s ability to spend augmented
    by the debiting of private bank accounts.
    In general, mainstream economics errs by blurring the differences
    between private household budgets and the government budget. For
    example, Barro (1993: 367) noted: ‘we can think of the government’s
    saving and dissaving just as we thought of households’ saving and dissaving’.
    This errant analogy is advanced by the popular government budget
    constraint framework (GBC) that now occupies a chapter in any standard
    macroeconomics textbook. The GBC is used by orthodox economists
    to analyse three alleged forms of public finance: (i) raising taxes; (ii)
    selling interest-bearing government debt to the private sector (bonds);
    and (iii) issuing non-interest-bearing high-powered money (money creation).
    Various scenarios are constructed to show either that deficits are
    inflationary if financed by high-powered money (debt monetisation), or
    that they squeeze private sector spending if financed by debt issue. While
    in reality the GBC is just an ex post accounting identity, orthodox economics
    claims it to be an ex ante financial constraint on government
    spending.
    The GBC leads students to believe that unless the government wants to
    print money and cause inflation it has to raise taxes or sell bonds to get
    money in order to spend. Bell (2000: 617) noted that the erroneous understanding that a student will gain from a typical macroeconomics course is
    that ‘the role of taxation and bond sales is to transfer financial resources
    from households and businesses (as if transferring actual dollar bills or
    coins) to the government, where they are re-spent (i.e., in some sense “used”
    to finance government spending)’.
    What is missing is the recognition that a household, the user of the currency,
    must finance its spending beforehand, ex ante, whereas government,
    the issuer of the currency, necessarily must spend first (credit
    private bank accounts) before it can subsequently debit private accounts,
    should it so desire. The government is the source of the funds that the
    private sector requires to pay its taxes and to net save (including the need
    to maintain transaction balances) as we have seen in the previous section.
    Clearly the government is always solvent in terms of its own currency of
    issue.

    Full Employment Abandoned, 209-210

  33. A B (from last night)

    The fact of the matter is that we (Australia) has signed up to the UN convention on refugees which compels us to accept any refugees that wish to come to our shores.

    No doubt that would be why Potatohead and his department (and Sco Mo before him) are so determined to prove (by smear and innuendo) that the AS are not ‘refugees’, and drag out the assessment process for so long, at huge cost to the budget, and to their mental wellbeing.

  34. Mike Seccombe
    I find this kowtowing to Packer money breathlessly undemocratic.

    Baird is not under imminent threat, but he is “Teflon Mike” no more.

    These days he is more commonly described as “Casino Mike”, a reference to his government’s endlessly obliging approach to James Packer’s plan for the giant development at Barangaroo. Since it was originally, controversially approved under former premier Barry O’Farrell, the development has grown 100 metres in height and its floor space has more than doubled in size.

    It has not escaped the critics’ attention that the Packer family are among the biggest donors to Baird’s party. Nor that the state’s controversial lockout laws, intended to stop late-night, alcohol-fuelled assaults, do not apply to the very violent precinct around the city’s existing casino, The Star, and also excise Barangaroo.

    But there is a lot more to his decline than that, as was evidenced a couple of weeks ago when thousands of protesters descended on central Sydney. They came with a smorgasbord of issues, ranging from the local – the route of contentious WestConnex motorway, the axing of scores of ancient fig trees to facilitate construction of a light rail project – to the general – the sacking of 42 local councils across the state, draconian police powers and anti-protest laws, cuts to school and TAFE funding and the government’s extensive privatisation agenda.

    Quite suddenly, an awful lot of things are sticking to Baird. The punters are increasingly questioning his motives and the insiders are questioning his political judgement.

    https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Saturday%20Briefing%20112&utm_content=The%20Saturday%20Briefing%20112+CID_c7fb6c8bcb32233c89f053ed3e9ca06e&utm_source=EDM&utm_term=VISIT%20WEBSITE

  35. I’ve finally had time to read up on the Victorian firefighting situation. Like many of these situations, there is probably right or wrong on both sides, although it’s hard to avoid reaching the conclusion that there’s a strong level of self-interest on the part of the firies’ union in pushing for a resolution that involves quite a few more jobs for members.
    And that thought leads me to my broader observation, which is how incredibly pissed off Bill Shorten must be about the situation. The last thing any Federal Labor leader needs at any time, especially during campaigns, is to have militant unions on the front pages of the newspapers.
    Militant (often communist) unions have been a drag on Labor’s electoral prospects since the 1930s, if not earlier. Sadly, there seems to be nothing Andrews can do about it, given that he needs to dance with the one who brung him.

  36. Good Morning

    Its too close to call. Three weeks to go. I know its an uphill battle with all the odds against the Labor party in conventional political terms.

    However this is not conventional political terms. This is an exceptional election as its too close to call in a first term government’s campaign with three weeks to go.

    I think the defeatism is on the LNP side. Rummel made the case really well. I have nothing to argue with him on.

    I think we are seeing this too from the way LNP politicians are behaving. See Joyce insulting voters. See the LNP candidate not turning up to debates in bellwether seats in Eden Monaro. See Turnbull ducking out of a debate with Mr Shorten in LNP media heartland. Sky News peoples forum.

    The talk on the campaign trail from the LNP of a hung parliament.
    All the signs are there that the LNP do not expect to win. They expect to lose and are fighting an uphill battle to retain government.

    Thats the sense I am getting from the LNP camp.

    Labor is in this war with a real chance of winning. They might just do it.
    With too close to call polls I am not calling it a defeat for Labor in any terms. Its defeat for the LNP.

    As to who forms government three weeks for Labor to change too close to call to Labor in front.

  37. Good morning Dawn Patrollers. For a Saturday it’s fairly slim pickings.

    Peter Hartcher wonders if Turnbull has just had his banana republic moment.
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-malcolm-turnbull-echoes-paul-keating-with-post-mining-boom-warning-20160610-gpga23.html
    James Massola looks at the additional savings outlined by Labor yesterday.
    http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/federal-lection-2016-labor-claims-16-billion-savings-in-hit-to-families-private-health-unis-20160610-gpga79.html
    Lenore Taylor with a more measured analysis of the announcement.
    http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/10/bottom-line-of-budget-cuts-they-hurt-low-income-families
    While Michelle Grattan wonders why Labor didn’t announce these savings weeks ago.
    https://theconversation.com/bill-shortens-savings-package-looks-a-little-desperate-60881
    Michael Gordon warns us not to ask an economist about who has the better plan.
    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-values-election-20160610-gpgdvn.html
    Labor is looking to the long term says Rob Burgess.
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2016/06/10/snowballing-budget-improvements-way-forward/
    Karen Middleton on how both leaders’ parties are setting out to define their character.
    https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2016/06/11/turnbull-and-shorten-seek-define-their-character/14655672003360
    Michael Pascoe on the policy failure that is costing us most.
    http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/the-policy-failure-that-costs-us-most-20160610-gpgbos.html
    Some interesting outcomes from the latest Reachtel polling.
    http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/10/parties-tied-in-latest-poll-as-liberals-face-shock-upset-in-sa-safe-seat
    Urban Wronski on Turnbull doing a runner and handing the floor to Shorten.
    https://urbanwronski.com/2016/06/10/turnbull-does-a-runner-hands-floor-to-shorten/

  38. Section 2 . . .

    Elizabeth Farrelly ponders over the coastal storms.
    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/natures-called-our-bluff-and-we-cant-keep-ignoring-it-20160609-gpfdwg.html
    Amazing drone video of the flooding Cataract Gorge in Tassie.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/06/09/breathtaking-beauty-amid-storm-devastation-in-tasmania/
    Jim Middleton with a good look at how Michelle Guthrie has landed in the ABC.
    https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2016/06/11/michelle-guthrie-begins-managing-direction-the-abc/14655672003357
    Quentin Dempster on how voter fury is rising over sluggish internet speeds.
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2016/06/10/voter-fury-rising-sluggish-internet-speeds/
    If you don’t feel concerned after reading this I would be surprised.
    http://www.theage.com.au/comment/five-reasons-why-sensible-people-would-actually-support-donald-trump-20160610-gpg4ku.html
    Is Trump the modern day Nero ready to burn down America?
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/10/donald-trump-modern-day-nero-us-politics-election-2016
    Mike Seccombe writes on how Mike Baird is losing his lustre.
    https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2016/06/11/nsw-premier-mike-bairds-flaws-beginning-show/14655672003359
    Could our dollar and interest rates really crash?
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/money/2016/06/10/aussie-dollar-hit-40-cents/
    This is a good move from the SA government. Google.
    /news/south-australia/roadwork-crews-face-50k-fines-for-leaving-needless-speed-signs-under-proposed-new-laws/news-story/1d21ad4d18d5a3771048a4b58d97afc1

  39. Section 3 . . . with Cartoon Corner

    Peter Wicks examines the prospect of Joyce losing his seat and leaving Nash to become Deputy PM.
    http://wixxyleaks.com/what-if-the-other-side-of-barnaby-joyce-losing/
    Said Barnaby loses his cool and tells a constituent to “piss off!”.
    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-barnaby-joyce-tells-constituent-to-piss-off-during-heated-pub-exchange-20160610-gpg857.html
    And the ACT Chief Minster piles into the “arrogant” Joyce over his proposal to uproot 170 public servants and send them to Armidale or to piss off.
    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/public-service/public-servants-forced-from-their-homes-by-barnaby-joyce-says-act-chief-minister-20160610-gpg3h2.html
    A disturbing new report on the abuse of women in Nauru.
    https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/immigration/2016/06/11/women-nauru-report-documents-abuse/14655672003353

    Alan Moir on long term economics.

    Andrew Dyson says goodbye to Mohammad Ali.

    David Pope nails Parakeelia.

    David Rowe and the tax zombies.

Comments Page 4 of 17
1 3 4 5 17

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *