BludgerTrack: 52.8-47.2 to Labor

Slight movement to the Coalition in this week’s poll aggregate reading, with still no sign of slackening in the trend towards One Nation.

A bit of a blip towards the Coalition in this week’s reading of the BludgerTrack poll aggregate, which only has a new Essential Research result to go on. This translates into extra seats for the Coalition in Victoria and Queensland. The only other feature of the result worth remarking on is that it’s still onwards and upwards for One Nation.

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.

366 comments on “BludgerTrack: 52.8-47.2 to Labor”

Comments Page 2 of 8
1 2 3 8
  1. Lizzie

    Gerard isn’t having a very good day.

    Gerard the Glum never got over his grief caused by the end of the Cold War. The final nail was Santamaria’s last great white hope,Toned Abs, getting the royal order of the boot. Sad 😉

  2. Victoria:

    I listened to the Nance podcast last night. He doesn’t rate the info given by John Schindler very much, which I thought was interesting.

  3. Fess

    Yes I mentioned that yesterday to PhoenixRed. I think Nance said wtte that Schindler is not credible. One thing that came to mind is that Schindler writes for the Observer publication which until recently had the involvement of Trump’s son in law Jared Kushner who is married to Ivanka. Perhaps Nance thinks that Schindler is/was compromised because of that. From my observations, Schindler has been ahead of the game in reporting stuff on the Whitehouse etc. So I will reserve my judgement on that.
    Meanwhile, if true this is sad…….

    Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump

    I will not be attending the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner this year. Please wish everyone well and have a great evening!
    8:53 AM · Feb 26, 2017
    7,509 RETWEETS
    25,898 LIKES

  4. One thing that came to mind is that Schindler writes for the Observer publication which until recently had the involvement of Trump’s son in law Jared Kushner who is married to Ivanka.

    The Observer is the Sunday version of The Guardian.

  5. Dan Gulberry

    Good point. That too. As I said, I have been reading his stuff since before the election, and his information has been solid to date.

  6. I am still gobsmacked by the actions of the Victorian Speaker and Deputy Speaker.

    What on earth were they thinking?

    Arrogance and the over-riding sense of entitlement rules.

  7. Did Julie Bishop have the intention of resembling Claire Underwood from the US House of Cards in that photo op at the Lincoln memorial? Because if so, mission accomplished

  8. Funny watching the Sky Agenda program and seeing them saying that the govt doesnt know what to do or what its doing.They are self imploding before our eyes.

  9. bemused

    ‘There is something distasteful in hubris about a banning.’

    How can lizzie’s comment possibly be interpreted as hubris?

    If she’d written: “Yay, William! I knew that if I kept up at it long enough, you’d ban him. Well done, me.” you might have a case.

    As it is, I don’t think lizzie lobbied for a ban, and I don’t see her comment as in any way self congratulatory.

    If you had the standards you claim you have, you’d apologise. Having the standards you actually do have, I expect you to dig in and try and justify yourself.

  10. I will be very disappointed if there is a political backdown on this.

    Pandering to marginal electorates over rides all other interests.

    Contrast this supposed back down by the state government with the arrogance of its decision, made with no community consultation, to build a new youth detention centre in the safe Labor seat of Werribee.

    It’s pretty obvious why voters are turning away from the political duopoly to support minor parties and independents, in particular PHON.

  11. I will add, that, if anything, I was surprised at how tolerant people were of John Smith last night. Most posters seemed to recognise that he was not well (he had stated that he wasn’t in posts a few months ago, when he begged forgiveness for any offence he had caused).

  12. pegasus @ #67 Sunday, February 26, 2017 at 10:06 am

    I will be very disappointed if there is a political backdown on this.

    Pandering to marginal electorates over rides all other interests.
    Contrast this supposed back down by the state government with the arrogance of its decision, made with no community consultation, to build a new youth detention centre in the safe Labor seat of Werribee.
    It’s pretty obvious why voters are turning away from the political duopoly to support minor parties and independents, in particular PHON.

    So the Greens new strategy is to be the NIMBY party. Thanks for that revelation.

    I just have no time for NIMBYs, the Greens can have them.

  13. zoomster @ #70 Sunday, February 26, 2017 at 10:09 am

    I will add, that, if anything, I was surprised at how tolerant people were of John Smith last night. Most posters seemed to recognise that he was not well (he had stated that he wasn’t in posts a few months ago, when he begged forgiveness for any offence he had caused).

    Easily ignored.

  14. bemused

    ‘I have in the past, but don’t bother any more. Pointless.’

    All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing.

    The standard you walk by is the standard you accept.

    At the very least, if you’re not prepared to call things out at the time, STFU about them later. If you let them pass uncommented, then it’s reasonable to assume that they didn’t actually offend you and you’re just using them as an excuse.

  15. I will add, that, if anything, I was surprised at how tolerant people were of John Smith last night.

    I think what really happened is that most people just scrolled past him. I know I did.

  16. peg

    ‘It’s pretty obvious why voters are turning away from the political duopoly to support minor parties and independents, in particular PHON.’

    Because real parties have to make hard decisions which upset real people and have electoral consequences, whereas minor parties can promise the earth, unicorns and rainbows and never have to deliver even those.

  17. Bemused

    So the Greens new strategy is to be the NIMBY party. Thanks for that revelation.

    Not what I said or implied. But it would be pointless to argue the toss with you.

  18. Freedom of speech is two way. It doesn’t mean you have to tolerate speech you disagree with.It give you the right to tell the person they’re out of line.

  19. zoomster @ #73 Sunday, February 26, 2017 at 10:11 am

    bemused
    ‘I have in the past, but don’t bother any more. Pointless.’
    All it takes for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing.
    The standard you walk by is the standard you accept.
    At the very least, if you’re not prepared to call things out at the time, STFU about them later. If you let them pass uncommented, then it’s reasonable to assume that they didn’t actually offend you and you’re just using them as an excuse.

    I don’t run the blog. It is the standard William accepts.

  20. Z

    Because real parties have to make hard decisions which upset real people

    The upset conveyed by swinging voters in marginal sand belt electorates versus the upset conveyed by voters in a safe Labor electorate. A back down for the former but not the latter.

    Cynical political and strategic calculation by Labor on display.

  21. bemused

    Can’t see how your last comment relates to what I’ve said at all.

    Just as I can’t see how lizzie was being hubristic – and you haven’t been able to explain how she was.

    But, once again, you’d rather go off on tangents than apologise, and I knew that in the beginning (unlike you, knowing something wasn’t going to achieve anything didn’t stop me trying…)

  22. There’s ‘the pack’ and the ‘mean girls’ as well.

    Conveniently, when someone gets offended by the use of one of these terms, all of a sudden they’re not counted as one of them.

  23. lizzie @ #50 Sunday, February 26, 2017 at 9:36 am

    “Sad” is Trump’s put down, as if he’s superior to everyone else. Not sure that it deflates any angst.

    I agree Lizzie,
    It’s like “fake news” and “I don’t accept the premise of your question”, used to stop any further comment of substance as to why they think the expressed position is wrong.

  24. Is there anything more pathetic than watching the Libs complain because the pet monster they created, Abbott, has turned on them.

  25. BiS

    I have used ‘I don’t accept the premise of your question’ and I think it was totally justified.

    e.g “Given the pink batts fiasco, how can you promise that Labor will be able to deliver X?” contains within it an assumption that should be challenged. Letting it go through to the keeper simply allows the mistruth to be continued.

    (Sophie Mirabella took out ads in all our local papers – there’s something like eleven of them – where she simply printed my “I don’t accept the premise of your question. The insulation program was very successful…” response in full – with big fonts and red lettering as a quarter page ad. I loved it.)

  26. Katharine Murphy’s article in the guardian yesterday left me feeling angry and disappointed. According to her, the government had told Australia Post boss Ahmed Fahour that if he didn’t take a pay cut he would be removed from the job and that was why he quit.

    Now I would have thought that was a step in the right direction, but Murphy preferred to focus on what she called the “brutality” of it all. According to her the government only applied the blow torch to Fahour because it was copping political heat from Pauline Hanson over the enormity of his salary and this was bad because the guy had done a terrific job turning Australia post around and this is all the thanks he gets. Well I would have thought a multi million dollar salary was enough thanks to be going on with.

    I did a rough calculation based on Fahour’s $5.6 million salary package and that equates to more than $1000 an hour (based on 100 hours of work for every week of the year). To put that in perspective, a friend of mine who works his arse off for AP delivering their parcels in all kinds of weather and difficult driving conditions receives the princely sum of $25 an hour.

    It never seemed to occur to Murphy that there was a very important issue of fairness involved in all of this, something that since 2014 has been gaining more and more traction politically. Why should CEO’s continue to receive ever increasing obscene salaries while ordinary workers are struggling with flat lining wages and job insecurity.

    The Liberals no doubt took the action they did for cynical political reasons – they wouldn’t sully themselves with any concerns about equity or fairness – but their action was still laudible, despite their motives. And Pauline Hanson, for all her racism and other hair brained ideas, deserves some credit for shining a light on this kind of unacceptable extravagance by the wealthy.

    If this is the best Murphy can do I think she is writing for the wrong newspaper.

  27. Further to my above, with Trump’s obvious dislike for Baldwin’s portrayal of him, this at an event of long standing tradition would end up being a massive humiliation for Trump. 🙂

Comments Page 2 of 8
1 2 3 8

Leave a Reply

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