The latest fortnightly YouGov poll has Labor down a point on the primary vote to 32%, the Coalition steady on 34%, the Greens up two to 12% and One Nation down one to 9%, with the combined result for all others steady on an ample 13%. The respondent-allocated two-party result shifts a point in Labor’s favour to reach 50-50, with the Greens both increasing their primary vote and recorded a somewhat stronger flow of preferences to Labor. The results remain peculiar for the high overall level of minor party and independent voting.
Also featured are a comprehensive seat of leadership ratings: Malcolm Turnbull on 44% approval (down one on six weeks ago) and 48% disapproval (up one); Bill Shorten on 43% (up one) and 46% (down one); Pauline Hanson on 42% (up three) and 50% (down two); Richard Di Natale on 26% (up one) and 39% (up one); Nick Xenophon on 52% (up two) and 28% (up three); Bob Katter on 36% (up three) and 41% (down two); Tony Abbott on 34% (steady) and 57% (up one); and Christopher Pyne on 32% (up one) and 44% (steady). Other findings are that 66% are worried about North Korea, up 12% on eight weeks ago, with 29% not worried, down 11%. Fully 43% would support military action in response to the missile test, with an equal number opposed. Sixty-four per cent would support banning the niqab, with 26% opposed; for the burqa, 67% support and 24% opposition; but for the hijab, 29% support and 61% opposition.
The poll was conducted Thursday to Monday from a sample of 1032.
guytaur: “sallyrugg: The postal vote on marriage equality is going to be the biggest own goal a government has ever seen. We’re ready to win this.”
At the moment, it seems to be mainly an own goal for those who took the case to the High Court, and received a unanimous verdict against them, including a requirement to pay costs.
meher baba
It is unlikely the Greens would object to a bill that protects religious celebrants from having to wed couples outside their doctrine. It is extremely likely that the Greens would object to a bill that effectively amounts to making religious belief an exemption to discrimination law, which is the only way an exemption for cake bakers and florists can be read (if you bake wedding cakes or do wedding bouqets but refuse to do so for a same sex wedding it is clear that you are discriminating on the basis of sexuality and should be just as vulnerable to suit for that as you would be if you refused to sell to a gay person for a non-wedding) but I doubt the Coalition will put such a bill up, there’s too many in the Coalition who recognize such a thing is ridiculous.
MB
The no case is on the wrong side of history.
Its that simple.
meher baba @ #801 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:18 pm
It’s the Vibe!
A 24 year old goes to child court for a crime he didnt commit:
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-07/kimberley-man-mistakenly-convicted-of-crime-he-did-not-commit/8879608?pfmredir=sm&sf112179063=1
n the whole baking thing. Its a red herring. Thats is the jurisdiction of the States. Not to be included in a Marriage Act
The HC made it’s ruling and now it is up to the Aus people to have theirs. The NO campaign want a boycott or people not to vote. Don’t give them the opportunity. Vote YES.
Now, as far as I am aware there is nothing in the survey to say that the form has to be filled out by the person it is addressed to.My next door neighbours couldn’t care one way or the other and said they were going to bin it. I asked if I could fill it out and mail it back and they said yes.
So,is it legal to do this.?
guytaur @ #803 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:19 pm
History is written by the Winners. That’s not the plaintiffs here comrade.
Would the nutjobs in Turnbull’s party care all that much if he did strongly support a yes vote. Is he being totally craven for no reason? Surely he’s got more to lose looking craven than not
sonar @ #807 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:21 pm
It’s got a special name called fraud!
Victoria
If you are around, some advice please. Which are the best non MSM sites to keep abreast of Trumpgate? I find Bill Palmers a bit over the top and Louise M is not easy to follow. Thanks.
First HC prediction tick.
Next, Baaarnyard and co booted.
This HC is a black letter literalist crew, no interpretation of morality.
ChristianEqual: As Christians it’s our moral duty to guide our Gay brothers and sisters safely through this terrible process. #voteYES #marriagequality
Greensborough Growler @ #808 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:21 pm
Short term thinking is not a viable strategy except for short term thinkers.
GG, it isn’t being run by the electoral commission, it is not binding,and so how would you ever know in what situations someones survey was marked..?
Fraud, methinks not.
Sprocket – Yup, HC giving itself elbow-room to give Barnyard an upper-cut.
sonar
No, it’s not. In order to fill out someone else’s survey you need to be designated as their trusted person (the means to do this for people who aren’t overseas has yet to be announced as far as I know).
AraulloJake: Do not forget this photo: the moment a spineless leader found out his unnecessary public vote on LGBT human rights was going ahead. #auspol pic.twitter.com/huY4LGk2xW
antonbruckner11 @ #809 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:21 pm
When being craven is the only thing you have going for you it pays to keep in practice.
sonar
It’s illegal to provide false or misleading information to the ABS. That includes filling out someone else’s material from the ABS and returning it without being a properly designated representative (such is inherently misleading).
E….
My point is how will anyone know who fills out the form….does it have to be signed….?
sonar @ #815 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:25 pm
You take your chances then. Send us all a postcard from whatever prison they send you!
the lnp will delay the vote on marriage equality as long as they can.
This includes the wording of the bill which will likely ascribe a common law civil union to gay marriages to define them from so called traditional marriages.
the conservatives will still vote against it regardless of the survey, justifying it as the electorate knows their stance on marriage equality which is why they were elected.
Ratsak – Think you’re right. He’s caved so many times he doesn’t know how to stop.
GG, just asking the obvious questions that I haven’t heard being discussed in the media.
When I go to vote at an election I have to present myself at a polling booth or designated place to prove it is me that is voting.
You can put as many numbers on a form you like but at the end of the day the ABS is not going to have any clue about who actually filled out the form.
Greensborough Growler @ #809 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:22 pm
Not necessarily. It seems they are giving permission for someone to fill it in on their behalf.
‘Assisted voting’ if you will.
Al Pal – MSM Trump Russia thing;
Despite the earlier stuff up, go CNN
http://edition.cnn.com/specials/politics/trump-russia-ties
For the non-MSM I rely on Vic and PhRed with caveats.
@Boris
My bet is that far right extremists elements will do that, especially One Nation.
Thank you bemused, I thought that was the case.
sonar: “So,is it legal to do this.?
You should surely know that the answer to this question is No.
ChristianEqual: As Christians it’s our moral duty to guide our Gay brothers and sisters safely through this terrible process. #voteYES #marriagequality
Not just our gay brothers and sisters but also our christian brothers and sisters who are against marriage equality. I would have thought they were the ones more in need of guidance.
meher baba @ #798 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:14 pm
Because, of course, they have a history of doing exactly that when they find themselves in the minority … oh, wait … : )
Elaugaufein @ #819 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:28 pm
They are implying their trust in allowing you to do it.
It would be a totally different matter if you nicked it out of their letterbox and filled it in without their knowledge.
@ Sonar, re: filling out other people’s forms
As this is an opinion poll, not a vote, there are no legal protections.
However, as it is being mailed out to people, there are the normal protections that apply to mail.
This website implies that opening your neighbour’s mail with their permission is completely legal, although they are not lawyers of course.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=663226
So yes, You can ‘vote’ for them if they are fine with that.
unionsaustralia: BREAKING: Turnbull’s harmful postal survey waved through by High Court. We didn’t want this, but we will win it. Vote YES for equality. pic.twitter.com/lBL7QK7T6X
sonar
The legality of an action does not hinge upon whether you are caught. Whether or not something is permissible and whether you can do it without much likelihood of getting caught are entirely separate questions. There’s a decent chance you could steal the surveys from entire suburban streets and never got caught , that doesn’t mean it’s legal to do so.
Whether it’s moral to do so is also another discussion, and probably largely hinges on if you have the form owner’s permission do so.
bemused, that was my point. I have to state I have NO intention of stealing anyones vote. It came up in conversation with our neighbours over the fence while swapping vegies from our gardens.
antonbruckner11: “Would the nutjobs in Turnbull’s party care all that much if he did strongly support a yes vote. Is he being totally craven for no reason? Surely he’s got more to lose looking craven than not”
As I see it, Turnbull will be strongly supporting a Yes vote, but doesn’t want to do any joint campaigning with Shorten.
I know not many on here will agree with me, but I think Turnbull is justified in refusing to do this. In a few short years, Shorten has gone from opposing SSM, to supporting a plebiscite, to opposing a plebiscite/postal vote, and now to calling for Turnbull to campaign with him. IMO (and again I know that not many on here will agree with me), Shorten and Labor have been playing wedge politics with SSM since last year’s election.
zoid
I would include dutton, barnardi and zed.
zed is to the right of humphries, who he deposed, who is to the right of bernardi. humphries was an especially unpleasant right winger who as attorney general made it law that women seeking a termination had to view colour photos of fetuses before any proposed termination. zed in power would insist on sound effects be mandatory also.
but all of them will be moving amendments, points of order so as to delay it as much as possible.
Al Pal
Victoria
If you are around, some advice please. Which are the best non MSM sites to keep abreast of Trumpgate? I find Bill Palmers a bit over the top and Louise M is not easy to follow. Thanks.
************************************************************
Hi AlPal – I don’t mean to speak in Victoria’s place – but in deference to BK’s excellent US mainstream news reports sources – I also follow these 2 non-mainstream sources
http://www.rawstory.com/
http://www.politicususa.com/
They compile reports from mainstream sources such as NY Times and Washington Post as well as other sources and are probably left-leaning in their reporting but its a balance less restrained than those more traditional sources
sonar @ #838 Thursday, September 7th, 2017 – 4:40 pm
Except for the details such as the vegies, that is pretty much how I interpreted your original question.
Elagaufein: “It is unlikely the Greens would object to a bill that protects religious celebrants from having to wed couples outside their doctrine. ”
I thought I heard David Marr stating on Insiders a week or so ago that such legislation would be outrageous. And I had assumed that Marr’s views were fairly close to those of the Greens on this and most other issues.
You’re right Meher … not many would agree with you
@boris:
Yup.
Elagaufein: “It is unlikely the Greens would object to a bill that protects religious celebrants from having to wed couples outside their doctrine. ”
Thats sensible, you could hardly expect an imam to marry you whilst you are munching on a bacon sammo.
There’s a scientist..
https://twitter.com/otiose94/status/905682533567700992
Bill Shorten has said his position. He is arguing for ME as he views it as equality before the law.
Therefore the same laws will apply to gay people as to heterosexuals under his watch. If religious freedom is impacted for heterosexual couples it will be impacted for gay couples.
If religious celebrants don’t want to marry gay couples don’t get involved in civil ceremonies.
sonar: “so how would you ever know in what situations someones survey was marked..?”
As with many other things, the question of whether or not you have committed a crime, and the question of whether or not you are ever going to be caught out, are two entirely different things.
However, I suspect that the envelope into which you seal your completed survey form will have a detachable tag on the outside which will feature a declaration that you sign to the effect that you were the person to whom this particular survey form was sent. Signing this with a name other than your own would, of course, be fraud.
The cone of self-importance is descending
[unionsaustralia: BREAKING: Turnbull’s harmful postal survey waved through by High Court. We didn’t want this, but we will win it. Vote YES for equality. pic.twitter.com/lBL7QK7T6X]
[ChristianEqual: As Christians it’s our moral duty to guide our Gay brothers and sisters safely through this terrible process. #voteYES #marriagequal]