The latest Ipsos poll for the Fairfax papers is a much better result for the Coalition than the last such poll four weeks ago, with Labor’s lead narrowing from 53-47 to 51-49. This is presumably the result from 2016 election preferences: Ipsos also produces a respondent-allocated result, but it usually takes a bit of digging to get hold of it.
The Coalition is up four on the primary vote to 39%, Labor is down one to 34% and the Greens are steady on 12%. Malcolm Turnbull also records strong improvement in his personal ratings, with approval up five to 55% and disapproval down six to 38%, while Bill Shorten is down two to 38% and up one to 54%. Turnbull’s lead as prime minister is out to 57-30, compared with 51-33 last month. Also featured are questions on best party to handle various issue areas, which have the Coalition leading 60-33 on the economy, 56-33 on interest rates and 45-41 on asylum seekers, while Labor leads 48-41 on health, 49-42 on education and 49-35 on the environment.
The poll was conducted Wednesday to Saturday from a sample of 1200.
See also the post below this one on Super Saturday by-election polling. You may also care to observe the post-redistribution electoral pendulum I posted over the weekend (and perhaps even to give the tip jar at the top of the page a workout, redistribution calculation being rather laborious exercise).
GG
If you have been paying attention to the polls the move of the voters is to the left.
Don’t fall for the Murdoch propaganda.
Mr Shorten hasn’t as his policy prescription shows.
The fact is the LNP are right. Labor has moved to the left. It has had to. Its a result of listening to voters. Its part of the reason the Greens are having some troubles.
As we speak Malcolm Turnbull’s Tenant Creek presser sounds like that of a leftie. Invest more money in public housing. Increase health funding. More self determination for Indigenous people.
Pegasus @ #145 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 11:52 am
I have made clear distinction between the party hacks (like yourself) that post their slanted views on various topics. Most of these arguments never reach the ears of the voters and are more a parlour game of the politically interested and the wannabeees. So, you’re fair game in that context.
Ultimately, whom you vote for is your choice. However, it’s a pretty weak of you to regard those who choose to vote for other candidates than the ones you prefer as being “hoodwinked”. It’s that sort of arrogance that sees the Greens never being able to rise above being Labor preference gatherers. Long may that be the political reality.
@cat…”I see Pegasus is continuing her Piss On Emma Husar campaign.
As tawdry as a Green can get.”
Why the sour grapes cat? It was an informative article that she posted, and as a labor supporter I think this issue is very relevant and of interest to us. Don’t go shooting the messenger just because he/she happens to be a greens supporter.
boomy1
Why so coy about your gravatar?
My gravatar is a pegasus.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLTtOXIhrow
Big A Adrian @ #153 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 11:59 am
If the worst criticism Husar receives is that she had one of her male staff wash some dishes because it was “character building’, then she’ll become a feminist icon. This reeks of factional play acting!
GG
I agree, the arrogance of so many Laborites about the “deluded” (insert prejorative of choice) Hasonites (insert other non-Labor party of choice) is a wonder to behold.
@J341983
Agreed, I have been confident on Labor winning the Longman and Braddon by-elections. However the federal election I am not so sure, my doubts have been on the back of my mind since early this year.
Husar should use her own my to pay for domestic duties rather than use taxpayers money.
Pegasus – i agree with you proposition at 10.51, however it is not only ‘laborites’ (although a couple of those put me off posting recently) who shut down discussion and or will not move on – it is posters from all persuasions.
Pegasus, I wonder why you spend so much time on this site, such is your disdain for most of its inhabitants.
It’s not as though you are going to change any minds – quite the opposite.
Haven’t you anything better to do than trawl through the internet to find anti-Labor articles to post here?
But yet Pegasus you are all the crap wankers you take fantastic delight in pointing out, When is it going to end.
Pegasus @ #157 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 12:04 pm
One Nation are not distributing preference cards on the day, apparently. So, like the Greens, One Nation can’t control where their preferences go. Labor should pick up a healthy enough share to enable them to win.
On DTT and jenauthor
“If you want to know why I scroll past DTT: this kind of bullshit condescension is exactly why. You really are a pathetic soul if you insist on talking to others like this.”
DTT is remarkably thin skinned with a massively fragile glass jaw for one prepared to dish it out IMO. Same as Sexy Rexy.
J341983
No need for Trump to say it. Those sorts of stories are Fox New’s department.
Peter Broelman’s cartoon has turned up.
Regarding the PPM in the polling: the standard labor response to Shorten’s consistent trailing Turnbull in the PPM stakes is “oh but remember Tony Abbott in opposition?”. Well it was interesting to find out that in fact Tony Abbott overtook both Gillard and Rudd at some point before the 2013 election. Eg from a September 2013 newspoll:
“The latest Newspoll survey, conducted exclusively for The Australian at the weekend, showed the Opposition Leader in front of Mr Rudd as the nation’s preferred prime minister – 43 per cent to 41 per cent – after Mr Abbott’s support rose three points and Mr Rudd’s fell three points”
Its worth emphasising that Shorten has *NEVER* been ahead of Turnbull in the PPM stakes. I used to think this didn’t matter – yet now I see a disturbing trend of Turnbull’s PPM rating blowing out at the same time as the 2PP is narrowing. The point here is, while being unpopular for most of Abbott’s tenure as opposition leader, he succeeded in narrowing the gap and then finally overtaking the PM ahead of the 2013 election. Whereas the opposite seems to be happening now with Shorten – ie the gap is widening.
Hanson is a false populist.
She demonises on the basis of race to exploit the fears of the common voter.
Her votes have shown she is and always has been a Liberal and like them is a supporter of neoliberalism trickle down economics.
Beware the false populist. True populists support workers rights. They support equality and they do not demonise on the basis of race religion or any other ism.
Its indicative of the great failure of our media that they call Hanson populist. They don’t even understand the term
Pegasus: “Victorian Labor Senator Gavin Marshall has fallen victim to the factional tussle within his party over federal preselections.”
I’m sure that Senator Marshall’s contributions to parliamentary and public debates will be sorely missed…
If anyone can remember any of them. Personally, I can’t remember anything he has ever said or done, or even what he looks like!
Does anyone know if he is related to the Marshall who runs the UFU?
Darn @ #89 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 10:41 am
It’s one of the only books Trump has read and his favourite, so I imagine dtt has already read it.
Marshall is one of those fake lefties along with Carr. Good riddance.
Tristo
I am glad you have come to the light and agree with me about our great LNP winning the next election
I also know that you agree with me about our great LNP will the win the seats of Longman Braddon and Mayo
I always knew you was a secret LNP supporter just like myself
meher baba @ #169 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 12:17 pm
Yes, I think the concept of renewal is one that The Greens do not comprehend very well. Look at old Lee Rhiannon. In her spot in the Senate until she felt like going. When there were better candidates waiting and waiting and waiting in the wings.
Boo voters
Look at that smile. That’s what Vladimir Putin got from the two hour closed door meeting.
adrian @ #161 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 12:11 pm
Pegasus and Rex are simply the Anti Waynkers. They do not post on this site for our edification, they post on this site to try to influence the lurkers.
Amazingly, if they are not Greens’ electorate or parliamentary office or head office staffers, then neither of them have a job but they also seem to not need to have one. How fortunate for them.
** Why so coy about your gravatar? **
It is from a go nowhere band that comes from a place where there is little else to do but drink and start up bands, rave about other local bands and go on and on about how amazing the Uni life is there and that there is a really steep street that ‘you gotta see’…… and they regularly flog Australian rugby teams.
I avoid the place and instead head inland where the wine is good and there is some fun to be had curling and bushwalking.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/frydenberg-takes-on-getup-campaign-to-block-energy-plan-20180722-p4zsxw.html
Thanks GG. Much appreciated.
Big A Adrian @ #167 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 12:16 pm
The fact that Labor don’t address it, should tell you it’s not an overly important metric in the greater scheme of things. As you note, you can win elections being personally unpopular and lose elections being personally popular. Sure, the media like to use it because they want to sell media space and they need something to talk about.
The main game is winning the First Preference and TPP. That gives you the numbers to actually win and form Government. Last time I looked, Labor has been leading on those metrics for an awful long time. recent tightening is due to changes in how the Polling co’s distribute their preferences.
FFS, it’s like a dog without a bone.
Hey, Simon Katich. That’s all.
Cameron says: Monday, July 23, 2018 at 12:30 pm
Look at that smile. That’s what Vladimir Putin got from the two hour closed door meeting.
****************************************************************
New vaccine crises in China:
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/policies-politics/article/2156357/new-vaccine-scandal-grips-china-parents-say-theyve-lost?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1532308602
guytaur
Hanson is a ‘2GBist’. Her ‘talking points’ seem selected from what is playing well in Shoutback Radioland.
Absolutely no need for any concern on polling front
There is a strong causal link between LNP polling figures & the current state of scandal in the Government… at this moment scandal level is low.. parliament not sitting, Barnyard in protective custody etc.
Mal’s team can’t control the situation through to election time.. Bill will overcome.
Turnbull’s relative popularity is what’s keeping the Coalition in the game. I’ve always said that a popular moderate Turnbull Government is more terrifying to the right of the party room than a Labor Government.
poroti
Thats not a bad description. They do believe in neo liberalism there. 🙂
@Sceptic
Plus the budget predictions are pretty good at the moment, however commodity prices and house prices are falling. Those are going to make the mid-year financial review figures not favorable for the government. The government would be best advised go to an election before that.
I must have worked in profoundly different electoral systems for the past half-century than some other Bludgers. In campaigns here and the USA, apparently, all of those millions upon millions of dollars must have been wasted upon MSM advertising and in the candidates’ appearances. Goodness gracious me, voters can’t be hoodwinked into voting against their interests or staying at home by frightening scenarios or steaming piles of propaganda.
No, our typical “swinging”, “independent”, “fringe”, and minor party voter will only decide after thoroughly and objectively analysing the entire range of critical issues and the qualifications of the candidates. How could George Orwell have got it so wrong with that utter nonsense about “Newspeak”. Why, it doesn’t matter a fig that, for example, Bill Shorten is a former union leader, when even the ABC News invariably calls them union bosses and thus conjuring up image like the caricatures drawn by Paul Zanetti, the propagandandist upon whom silly Rupert Murdoch has been wasting his money for about 35 years now. We can be dead certain that Murdoch is a silly publisher because today his tabloids continue to waste more of their precious space recommending to our ever-alert voters that Albanese would make a better LOTO than Shorten.
“Look at that smile. That’s what Vladimir Putin got from the two hour closed door meeting.”
In over 20 years of Putin watching that is the very first time I’ve seen Vlad crack a smile … or show any form of facial expression for that matter.
J341983 @ #188 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 12:41 pm
That’s the perception promoted by the MSM and the political chatterers. Maybe respondents want Turnbull to implement Labor policy. Maybe respondents are aware that should Turnbull be ousted, then someone like Abbott, Dutton or Morrison is the next cab off the rank. Maybe voters are saying they want Labor but that Turnbull is the least worst option given the current state of the Parliament.
** Hey, Simon Katich. That’s all. **
Dunedin beer is nice. But what they do down there to their oysters is sacrilege. Deep frying?!?
But it does tell you all you need to know about the quality of their oysters compared to those from coffin bay.
KayJay @ #112 Monday, July 23rd, 2018 – 9:02 am
Do we qualify for mates rates?
People that eat oysters from Coffin bay are necessarily pretentious. Go up to Cowell. Better oysters there,
Mass shooting in Toronto.
https://www.skynews.com.au/
Eric Garland has a Master’s in International Affairs and has practiced intelligence for 20 years. This thread from him in January. Apologies for the length of the thread but this needs ventilation. Russian hacking continues daily in the US and of course they intend to hack and propagandise the 2018 mid terms. This kind of propaganda and misinformation from Russia continues in the media and and social media around the world.
How the US media helped cover up Trump’s relationship to Russia
Eric Garland
@ericgarland January 24, 2018
From 2016-2018, Trump managed to become president in part because the media obscured his ties to Russia – and kept covering it up. Here’s how they did it. Some still won’t stop.
I’d like to present the top-level findings of #GRINGO11 – in the context of the Fairness Doctrine, and a brighter future for a democracy.
For those of you just tuning in, my name is Eric Garland. I’ve been an intelligence analyst for corporations and governments for 20 years.
My life changed on December 11, 2016, after I delivered an impromptu “thread” here on Twitter explaining the history of Russian Active Measures and how they helped bring Trump to power.
That thread, I am now told, was the first time the narrative about Trump-Russia cut through to the general public. Millions read my tweets about how, no, this wasn’t about Hillary not campaigning in Wisconsin.
There was way more to it – and it was ugly.
Also, I’m told, it gave people hope that we could get through this.
Starting the next morning, corporate media outlets began an assault on my reputation that has gone on for 13 straight months.
One month ago, I began a deep-dive, pointillistic analysis into why I have been mentioned in over 60 negative characterizations of Trump-Russia.
My analysis is complete.
The patterns suggested are so serious, I have decided that it is best to anonymize all findings and turn the actual data over to law enforcement and the government. Only they have the legal standing and manpower to verify what is suggested.
I would like to describe the patterns of media behavior by numerous outlets – as well as my ultimate conclusion that we need to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine to protect our democracy.
*FINDINGS*
First, remember that on December 11, 2016 I was not a public figure beyond being an author and consultant.
I was not an elected official, captain of industry, or celebrity.
So…dozens of media articles, several arriving on the very same day…is a little weird.
I have asked experts in public relations the likelihood that this many articles would be written about a subject – according to the articles themselves, ironically – who would not normally warrant this level of media attention.
You know – over some tweets.
Professional opinions of PR experts varied. Some said, “They probably just perceive a competitor in the media space,” and others said, “You couldn’t pull this off, even with a $10 million budget and the willingness to bribe editors.”
Experts in Russian Active Measures and counterintelligence have been less equivocal: “This pattern of the same article about a critic repeated dozens of times has Kremlin written all over it. They didn’t necessarily do it, but it’s *how* they do it.”
Either way, a private citizen expressing opinions on Twitter is not, it seems to be unanimous, a newsworthy event that has inspired over 50,000 words of copy on dozens of media outlets. For over a year.
So. What’s up with this?
#GRINGO11 was my way of answering that question. Myself. As a professional analyst. No other cooks in the kitchen.
Here’s the objective data I collected:
Article titles
Dates of publication
Outlet
Outlet ownership (including corporate structure, capital structure, senior leadership)
Author, including information about professional background
Word count
Additional targets (usually Louise Mensch, John Schindler, and Claude Taylor)
Talking points (e.g. “Nobody serious thinks Russia had an impact)
Keyword clusters (bizarre, conspiracy theory, Democrats, distraction, rant)
Outbound links and references
Inbound links or “backlinks” (the other outlets that refer to the article in an article of their own)
Of these, talking points and keywords are subjective assessments – all other data is objective.
Moreover, the reason I have pulled out certain talking points and keywords is because, objectively, *they appear repeated across different authors and outlets.*
This analysis contains inherent and inevitable biases, as does all analytical work. Here are the potential weaknesses I believe could be part of the my conclusions.
1. Well, this is personal. They’re attacking me. So, assume some emotion is involved, like any human being.
2. I see the actions, but without access to, say, emails and intercepts communications, I can only but speculate as to motive of these pieces. I suspect they vary depending on the media outlet.
Some of my assessments are purely subjective. For example, I’ve put together a Timeline of Trump-Russia Headlines Vs. Deza.
Who decided what fact and opinion? Me.
I think I nailed it, but hey, others might disagree.
Example: January 10, 2017 – Testimony by DNI Clapper, DIRFBI Comey, DIRCIA Brennan before Senate Intel.
Also 1/10/17, in the NY Times: “Breitbart’s Man in Rome: A Gentle Voice in a Strident Chorus”
I judge news about the former as serious, and the latter as Deza.
Subjective.
3. I am an experience intel analyst who writes books and teaches courses for other analysts. That said, I hold no security clearance (why I can speak freely, FYI) and have never had one. Never done straight gov’t spy catching.
As such, I recommend true experts such as @MollyMcKew @selectedwisdom @20committee and all the other voices you find useful. I’m but a single analyst, with flaws and limitations. Nota Bene.
That said, let’s get into the topline conclusions of #GRINGO11:
Trump did not win without complicit media, before and after the fact.
Both on “regular” and social media, legitimate news on Trump-Russia was published daily, before and after the election, and has continued without stop, for fourteen months and counting.
As well as information that clouded reality and attacked critics.
As the USIC and US Congress concurs, political warfare operations have been run by and/or amplified by Russian entities through automated digital actors and agents/assets compromised by Russian intelligence.
In addition to amplifying the distraction of the day, one of these major initiatives has been to characterize all analysis of the complexity of the “Trump Operation,” as illegitimate, a conspiracy theory, or mentally ill.
Classic Kremlin, BTW.
First, I’ll describe how, they, with some speculation, why.
The how is described by objective fact.
Negative framing of Trump-Russia emerged the morning of Dec. 12, 2016, as millions were opening their minds to new possibility.
First on the scene? Glenn Greenwald. As always.
He’s predictable; no shock.
Another outlet publishes: “Long-ass Twitter rant about Russia and the 2016 election sparks “Game Theory” meme”
See what they did there?
This is framing. It’s not an intelligence analyst who just told you some new stuff. It’s a “meme.” Like, y’know, a Pepe Frog.
Not real. Not human. Not authoritative. Not trustworthy. A meme.
From there, the characterizations intensified.
Next theme: Don’t trust Twitter or Medium.
Filled with weirdos.
Odd, because “tech” outlets were talking like this. What about, I dunno, the genius of social media?
Nope. LISTEN ONLY TO MAJOR MEDIA.
Huh.
By December 16, 2016, the attacks got very personal.
– TOTALLY insane
– Drug use!
– Democrats just trying to feel better!
– He’s a CHARLATAN and SNAKE OIL SALESMAN
– DON’T BUY FROM HIS BUSINESS, HE’S FRAUD
A second piece appeared from RW media. An hour later.
Weird thing was conservative media source linking to the “liberal” media source an hour after the first published. Saying that the other one was really the authority on the subject.
Not typical media behavior.
This goes on for a month until Trump is inaugurated.
That first week, he basically tongue kisses Putin and goes nuts.
Whoa, guess there’s a Russia thing after all.
But the articles about me start up again.
Weird, right? Doesn’t this prove…
The frame is set: He’s a nut, Dems just want to just feel better.
But dude, that first week. It looked bad.
That’s when trolling starts up again for two weeks.
THEME: Dems just want to feel better. Stop looking for connections. Also, it’s not Russia.
Then Feb 13: Mike Flynn is removed for his lying about connections to Russian ambassador Sergei Kislyak.
All is quiet for me, but not for @LouiseMensch.
I don’t get anything until after the testimony of @Comey on March 20.
But Louise is writing some compelling stuff. And now she’s the focus.
Dirty moves. Now revealed. I’ll let the Feds sort that out.
Comey testifies March 20: “Hell yes, there’s a Trump-Russia thing.”
Four days later, I get called for interviews that are, in the final publications, distorted and dismissive, to be nice about them.
From that day onward, in their actual pages and in the behavior of their employees on Twitter, my colleagues and I come under assault on a day-by-day basis by media companies backed by corporate monopolies, structured finance, and private interests.
From about April 1, 2017 to last weekend, the behavior repeats. To what does it correlate?
Truly bad news for Trump.
After a while, it’s unmissable.
And just quickly, who writes these?
Average age: 29-32. Average professional experience: 4. Education? Almost all Bachelors in English.
Three with international affairs or poly-sci.
None with experience covering geopolitics or intelligence.
Perfect choice for the owners of these media companies. Smart enough to write well, no curiosity, no real experience, afraid to lose an opportunity.
Also, raised in a social media environment where you can swear in a juvenile fashion at adults without shame. Perfect for provocation ops. GRU smiled…
That’s pretty much the whole story right there, except for the various parent companies: would-be monopolies, structured private equity finance (lots of room to hide shenanigans, BTW), and privately-held LLCs owned by billionaires.
There are intermarriages. Connections to those who spied for Stalin during WWII. Other areas of interest.
OK SO WHAT DO WE DO???
FAIRNESS DOCTRINE, SWEET FRIENDS!!!
That thing where if you’re in the news business you have to represent the public interest, tell the truth, adhere to standards, and answer to a democratically-elected government!
We did this for years, especially when the Nazis and Russkis were trying to infiltrate us in preparation for WWII.
It worked great!
For-profit news is a failure. CONSOLIDATED MONOPOLIES of for-profit news is a danger to democracy.
We can fix it!
We must and we will.
1. The new interpretations of FARA: Roto-rootering paid agents of foreign countries is going to clean things up significantly.
2. Reinstate the FCC Board of Governors with the Fairness Doctrine!
We must insistent on transparency about which company owns which outlet and analyze their content.
All they need do is adhere to pre-existing (but abandoned) journalistic standards of professionalism to make this an easy ask.
Remember: In America, you have the right to free speech, but not the freedom to coordination foreign intelligence operations.
We need government to help sort that stuff out.
That’s about it! I’m turning the data – and it’s a little fugly – over to authorities.
As for my fellow citizens, ask for the Fairness Doctrine! By name!
And…I think we’ll be OK.
But first…some prosecutions.
God bless America, and you if you’re reading this, and all nations, and all people, not one individual left out.
Now, let’s explore space.
I will one day go to Cowell. I have not yet been to coffin bay.
My favourite oysters were shucked directly off the rocks around the Montebello Archipelago.
But, if we are to be pretentious, I did have some good ones when upgraded to first class flying to NY – they were drowned in the finest vodka and liberally sprinkled with caviar.
** Apologies for the length of the thread… **
Not accepted. Grrrrrr!