BludgerTrack: 53.7-46.3 to Labor

Two new poll results this week, including the first Ipsos poll in four months, have failed to budge the BludgerTrack poll aggregate.

Two new polls this week, from Ipsos and Essential Research, have wrought next to no change in voting intention, outside of an improvement for the Greens. However, their state breakdowns have caused Labor to make a net gain of two, having picked up two in Queensland and Victoria, while dropping one in New South Wales. Both pollsters produced leadership ratings this week, but I would caution against reading anything into the changes in the leadership ratings trends, as I don’t make any effort to correct for Ipsos’s consistent peculiarity in producing unusually strong approval ratings for both leaders. In other words, both leaders are up this week not because their ratings have improved – indeed, the opposite happened, particularly for Bill Shorten – but simply because there was an Ipsos result. This is not an issue with the preferred prime minister trend, on which Malcolm Turnbull increased his lead.

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.

1,282 comments on “BludgerTrack: 53.7-46.3 to Labor”

Comments Page 24 of 26
1 … 23 24 25 26

  3. shellbell

    I was just looking at his record.

    In an 18 All draw with the French he scored all 18 points.

    Amazingly enough one Frenchman scored all of theirs.

  6. Be interested to see how Bret Stephens responds to the Liberal panelist tonight. He is a conservative and a Republican but not a Republican of today’s Republicans owing to their pious numptyness.

    The Libs are following their US counterparts so it will be interesting to see how he responds.

  10. Hi LU,
    I’ve got a bunch of MATLAB, AMPL, AIMMs, java, python, C++ and now Julia code that I want to rationalise, but I’m constrained to use python for my main project for the time being.

    I am probably the last person in the world you want to take coding advice from …. but, after having to bring together various useful snippets (programs / functions / procedures/ routines /whatever) of code, I have found Python actually works best as a “wrapper”. So, you use Python as the organising/ overarching script (i.e. calling language) and then call each of your routines in different languages, using the command line in Python.

    You pass parameters to the routine you call, and take results back from that routine. This can be done in several ways, depending on the language you are calling.

    If you are not worried about how long your program takes to execute, then a surprisingly good way of exchanging parameters is to:

    1) write out the parameters you wish to pass to the routine you are calling from the Python Overlord script to a text file
    2) Get your routine in another language to read in these parameters from the text file, do its thing, and write the results to another”Results” text file.
    3) Get the next step in your Python Overlord script to read in the new parameters from the “Results” text file, before continuing on its merry way.

    Advantages: You can link all your code together; you can do this quickly; you do not need to translate everything to Python.

    Disadvantages: You will slow down the execution of your script, because reading and writing to and from text files is slow.

    Conclusion: If fast number crunching is not paramount, the quickest thing you can do to get your script / program working quickly is to bring everything together with Python, but still using your already-written scripts / routines. Remember, once it is working, you can then work on individual routines / modules to get better integration with Python. For example, you can actually call C and C++ from within Python – Google is your friend here. It will make your program/ script run far faster, but it will take a lot longer to implement than the exchanging of information via text files.

    Lemma: Now all the people who are actually trained as proper computer scientists will be so horrified at my advice they will give you highly useful information as to how to proceed, if you are not a rank amateur like me. Of course, the Lemma may be disproved by subsequent events.

  14. John Boy is right. Mari I’m sure it’s not beyond you to figure out how to put Rowe’s daily cartoon up here post the changes to PB that make it possible.

  21. AEMO has not said there will be a shortfall of Despatchable Power. Full stop. They have said it will only happen if no further replacement energy sources are fed into the system.

  24. It’s hard to take Bret Stephens seriously when he says, “let the market decide”. The market has decided: they want government subsidies and monopoly protection.

  27. If only Australia’s media had a conservative commentator like Bret Stephens.

    How refreshing to see someone argue their point on supposed conservative grounds not ideological grounds. No wonder he’s distanced himself from today’s Republican party.

  28. Whenever someone from the right does the ‘we were warned that X would wipe out the world if…and we’re still here’ they seem to ignore the fact that we were warned.

  29. JD:

    Actually the market wants operating certainty. Something it had from the last Labor govt, and something it hasn’t had from this coalition govt.

  33. Zeh

    Well, in the cases the commentator listed, we did act, which is why these threats didn’t turn out to be as catastrophic as predicted.

  35. C@t:

    Of course not. His views are clearly right of centre and should be opposed on their merits, not just as Dan G says ‘he opposed Trump, therefore that makes him one of the good guys’. Infantile bullshit.

  36. Zoomster,
    Those fools also never acknowledge that things have changed, just not catastrophically such that nongs like that person would admit it.

  38. JD:

    Yes but that’s the argument against Stephens. Remembering of course that he’s an interlocutor and probably isn’t up to speed with our politics.

  46. Sukker suckered on SSM by a legitimate conservative.

    Once again, there are no logical arguments against SSM. Sukker needs to take on board the views of his US conservative panelist.

Comments Page 24 of 26
1 … 23 24 25 26

Leave a Reply

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