Newspoll has Labor’s lead back at 53-47 after a 54-46 blowout a fortnight ago, with primary votes at 37% for the Coalition (up two), 38% for Labor (steady), 9% for the Greens (steady) and 8% for One Nation (down one). Both Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten are on 34% approval and 54% disapproval, which means one-point drops in both for Turnbull, and no change for Shorten. Oddly, Malcolm Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister has blow out to 46-29, from 43-33. Paywalled report from The Australian here.
shiftaling @ #538 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 8:31 pm
Player One is not trying to fool anyone, as has been discussed ad nauseum here.
Sorry if it is a bit difficult for you to understand that anyone could hold an opinion contrary to yours.
Boerwar @ #539 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 8:32 pm
I agree with this, and actually think this would be the best possible outcome of a difficult situation. The next parliament should do what parliaments are elected to do, and which this parliament has singularly failed to do – i.e. enact the will of their constituents.
Dave Donoven@davrosz
‘So, Tom Switzer and some random Liberal Party official are what constitutes balanced debate about marriage equality on #abc730, eh? Get fkd!’
Player One @ #532 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 8:20 pm
The purity and impotence argument.
Works well.
Player One @ #538 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 8:24 pm
Wot Bemused said!
Also, to paraphrase Boerwar’s more eloquent argument: you dance with the one who’s brung ya. Refusing to dance just gets you left in the corner like a wallflower. Better to win the dance contest. You could be waiting forever for Mr Right.
In other words, I find it touching that you are so confident that we will have a Shorten government after the next federal election, however, I am a subscriber to the maxim that, ‘A week is a long time in politics’.
So, better to force Turnbull into a capitulation, of sorts, on SSM, and a legislated outcome this term as a result of a resounding ‘Yes’ vote in the postal plebiscite…that a future Shorten government can improve upon.
Tony Abbott and Lyle Shelton?
Enjoy!
Anyone else watching 4 Corners?
Well i am gay and i will not fill out their survey.
It is not a vote and has no value at all.
The LNP has said they will ignore it.
It is dangerous to give support to the idea that a small group can have their rights put up for a popularity contest.
I am disappointed in the ALP for supporting the LNP farce.
C@tmomma @ #555 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:01 pm
If bemused said it, it was undoubtedly nasty, idiotic & misogynistic. But, that’s just incidental to the discussion at hand.
Let me propose you a thought experiment: what do you think would happen if the outcome of the voluntary postal survey was a ‘no’ vote? Would all the ‘yes’ proponents agree that the electorate has spoken, so let’s all just accept it and move on? No, of course they wouldn’t. They would undoubtedly be outraged and insist the whole process was flawed and that the outcome was illegitimate. Now think about how ‘no’ proponents might feel if the vote goes the other way.
Do you begin to see the problem?
C@t @9:01 PM: “So, better to force Turnbull into a capitulation, of sorts, on SSM, and a legislated outcome this term as a result of a resounding ‘Yes’ vote in the postal plebiscite…that a future Shorten government can improve upon.”
That’s it in a nutshell. All outcomes of the fake plebiscite will be bad for Turnbull, but a “No” vote would be a victory for the uglies of the Right. For The Australian. For Devine, Abbott, Kevin Andrews, Eric Abetz, Peter Dutton, Piers Ackerman and the rest of the Deplorables. And they’ll pull variations on the same trick again for the next signature issue for the right because they’ll know it works.
Anyway, i wont get a “survey”.
i recently tried to change my address with AEC. They sent a slightly threatening letter saying there was no record of my enrollment and there were severe penalties etc etc etc. (I have voted conscientiously since 1972)
I immediately thought incompetence – the AEC must have been privatised and was run by a couple of poor slaves in india somewhere and the taxpayer funded profits are off to California or some other Monster Republic.
Then i thought, this is a bloody sign.
It doesn’t matter who you vote for you get bloody right-wing capitalist supporting bourgeois “liberals” (some of whom think they are “left”.
Swamprat
I appreciate your concerns. We shouldnt subject the human rights of others to public vote. I’ve thought about boycotting, but I cant let No win by not acting. I’m not going to change your opinion but feel the need to explain my reasoning.
I am straight and am so totally voting yes in the survey. I appreciate gay folk feel appalled by the postal survey, and want to sit it out, but that isn’t going to sway me and my right to vote yes for marriage equality in whatever format that vote is presented to me.
Player One @ #559 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:12 pm
I must admit I do derive some wry amusement from P1 and a couple of others showing themselves up for what they are.
If they had a “survey”, “plebiscite” on whether Jews could have thier relationships recognised as a “marriage” would the ALP support that and campaign for “yes” or would they say this is a travesty and boycott to make it illegitimate?
swamprat @ #569 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:22 pm
That’s a straw swamprat argument if ever I saw one! We are not talking about the Jewish religion here. And to use it as your straw man shows an element of desperation from someone who just wants to use it as yet another excuse to kick Labor. Albeit, a lame one.
mimhoff @ #560 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:03 pm
Sheesh! No. In words you might understand better…if a plebiscite is all you extract from the almost cold, dead hands of the Religious Right in Australia, then you use it to send them a resounding, ‘Up Yours!’ message!
swamprat @ #565 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:22 pm
Labor would fight tooth and nail against holding such a plebiscite, but if that battle was lost, and it were to be held, would campaign flat out for a yes vote.
While you and P1 watched on in impotent purity I suppose.
C@tmomma
It is a valid example of a minority (religion) is irrelevant.
It is an analogy and quite legitimate. Your reaction testafies to its uncomfortableness.
(That you support the legitimiacy of thie farcical “survey” is no surprise.)
And it has Labor precedent.
I believe when gay sex was going to be decriminalised in Queenland by the Goss ALP government the main churches (Catholic, Anglican etc) supported it but wanted a preamble in the Act stating that while being decriminalised it was pretty bad, appalling etc etc. I believe that someone read out the proposed preamble with the word “Jew” instead of “homosexual” and the Christian worthies were supposed to have withdrawn their proposal in embarresment.
Is this true? I was told it at the time.
Steve777,
And they’ll pull variations on the same trick again for the next signature issue for the right because they’ll know it works.
Yep. Nothing succeeds like excess with the Uptight Right. So they would quickly move on to the next campaign they have put away in their bottom drawer, dust it off and use the limitless resources of the untaxed religious community to reclaim another lost shibboleth.
Which is exactly what they have been doing in America since Reagan.
Sportsbet odds for the sworn in Government after the next Federal election: Labor $1.55, Coalition $2.40: https://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/politics?LeftNav
The odds imply a probability of a Labor win at about 61%. That seems about right to me, maybe a little pessimistic, but I wouldn’t put it above 70%. As they say, “events”, “many a slip” and the sheer power and wealth arrayed against Labor.
Last night I suggested maybe we assume 53-47 means 51-49 in a real election. Maybe not, but maybe it’s a good precaution to assume that it does.
Player One @ #548 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 6:44 pm
Thanks for posting that link P1.
There is some impressive linear growth there.
Bemused
“While you and P1 watched on in impotent purity I suppose.”
———
You are joking. It is a bloody survey with a voluntory return.
I do not care whether it returns yes or no it will have zero effect. It is not a valid vote. Even the LNP has said they will gnore it.
Only the silly ALP thinks it is valid.
grimace @ #572 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:36 pm
Indeed.
“The Australian Greens leader says if the party’s bid to knock down the same-sex marriage vote fails in the High Court, the “yes” vote will still “win big”.
Richard Di Natale believes the upcoming challenge will overturn the “expensive” and “unnecessary” postal vote, which he described as a “glorified opinion poll”.
“However, should it go ahead, make no mistake. We are going to win, and win big,” he told reporters outside the Bridal and Honeymoon Showcase in Melbourne on Saturday.
“We are going to make sure that if Malcolm Turnbull wants to hear what Australians think, well he’ll hear it good and hard.”
Greens volunteers spent the morning distributing “Vote Yes” leaflets to those at the wedding showcase.”
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/yes-vote-to-win-if-challenge-lost-greens/news-story/463366770e257a17dabc60e0427a2423
……..,………………………………………………….
Swampy, doesn’t sound like the greens are advocating boycotting the vote, sounds pretty similar to the Labor position to me.
Very good interview on Lateline now on ABC 24 of the Legal representative of the parties seeking to have the postal survey thingy stopped.
He explains it more clearly than we can here.
You can catch Lateline on ABC 1 after QandA.
swamprat @ #573 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:40 pm
Whether or not the ALP thinks it is valid or not, only the HC stands in the way of it being held.
If it is held, I will to the best I can to disappoint those promoting it by voting ‘yes’, rather than allow me to be portrayed as indifferent or acquiescing.
You and P1 will bask in the glow of each others purity and impotency while your non-votes will be co-opted as having been equivalent to ‘no’ votes.
confessions @ #563 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 7:18 pm
My wife and I are straight folk and we’re appalled by this survey. Our intent from when it was announced was to do that the LGBTIQ community wanted, which is seemingly to vote yes. We were also persuaded by Bill Shorten’s speech on the farce in Parliament.
As I’ve said before, and it’s worth repeating, my wife and I empathise with the situation of the LGBTIQ in being subjected to this farce.
Qanda is a waste of space.
Vogon Poet
“Swampy, doesn’t sound like the greens are advocating boycotting the vote, sounds pretty similar to the Labor position to me.”
—————-
Well of course. The greens are just another liberal party.
I mean the Green and ALP Senators effectively voted theologically that the burqa is a “religious” garment, in line with their new spiritual leader Senator Georgie (right to be a bigot) Brandis.
Any Muslim woman who is religious better get herself covered up and hidden from society quick smart otherwise the Green/ALP Senators will be most cross.
FMD how many times is Mark Kenny going to report has sighted the fabled REAL MALCOLM (TM) before he wakes up to the fact that Malcolm is a hollow man?
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/snowy-poll-bounce-suggests-voters-prefer-the-old-malcolm-20170904-gya8gq.html
Anyone would think that Brian Trumble wasn’t about to have his arse handed to him by the High Court over the ME farce, had the legitimacy of his government blown up by administrative incompetence or was about to submit himself yet again to the right of his party over energy policy.
Bemused
Whether or not the ALP thinks it is valid or not, only the HC stands in the way of it being held.
If it is held, I will to the best I can to disappoint those promoting it by voting ‘yes’, rather than allow me to be portrayed as indifferent or acquiescing.
_________________________________________________
Yep. That’s my position. I don’t like calling it a ‘vote’. I’d prefer to call it an answer or response. But how I will respond depends on what will most advance the position I support. It is clear that any boycott will, in your words, ‘be portrayed as indifferent or acquiescing’. For that reason there is no possibility I will not respond ‘yes’ if this thingy goes ahead. But I really think it is legally dead in the water.
I don’t get it. I thought Jews were already legally entitled to marry?
And besides it wasn’t a poll bounce, 2pp went from 54-46 to 53-47, within the MOE.
The PPM is a beauty contest, I expect Turnbull to lead it through to the next election, regardless of who is leading the ALP.
“Qanda is a waste of space”
The ABC is a waste of space and money.
Well, i maybe the High Court will save the day. !
Survey things is a joke, illegal and appallingly condescending, but boycott it to see the likes of Abbott Shelton Pell Howard justified in their rants against equality
cud
They are now.
But after the homophobe survey, there could be precedent for a anti-semite survey, then an anti-union survey…… etc all paid for by taxpayers.
So gays are forced to partly pay for this nasty farce.
di Natale just said on HYBPA that he doesn’t want a pleb but if the HC doesn’t kill it he wants everyone to vote Yes.
I completely agree (although I respect the right of the LGBTI community to boycott it as an affront to their dignity).
It would be interesting to ask the hypothetical.
Suppose the government was holding a big expensive survey for some other purpose (say to ask people if they wanted a submarine fleet) and the political deal was that the survey would inform the Bill that would then be brought to Parliament.
Would such a survey survive the same HC challenge? Would it be deemed “not urgent”.
Take away the gay law reform aspect of this, and pose it as a question about whether the government can conduct a survey in order to inform its normal work.
I can hardly see how the HC would not come back to the government and say “if that’s how you want to do government, you have to get a proper appropriation to pay for the survey”.
Any takers?
Dio:
My view too.
cc
I’d love to see the HC kill it. It’s an appalling waste of $120M purely run to protect Turnbull’s pathetic clinging to power.
Diogenes @ #590 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 10:03 pm
But because I am not a member of the LGBTI community, I have no right to boycott it? At least not according to KB and a few others here.
Homophobe survey is a more accurate description.
Do you feel comfortable with gays getting married and kissing and embracing and such yukky images, does this ruin your precious memories of your wedding.
swamprat @ #589 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 9:59 pm
I propose an anti-‘Impotent but Pure’ plebiscite!
Boycott away P1, encourage all others against equality to boycott the survey too, let your voice be heard
Boris @ #597 Monday, September 4th, 2017 – 10:11 pm
: )
High Fives to Boris 🙂
I should add that I’m a moderate on the SSM and I don’t vilify anyone voting against it on religious grounds. My father is quite frankly a bigoted Catholic homophobe but he is also a very lovely, caring man who is a product of his upbringing. I think he’s irrational but I’m not going to think any less of him for voting No; that’s just how he is. It’s disappointing (every other member of my family is Yes) I’m not going to the wall over it. If I was gay or had LGBTI kids I may well feel differently.