BludgerTrack: 54.9-45.1 to Labor

Labor remains deep in landslide territory on the BludgerTrack poll aggregate, despite the moderating impact of this week’s Ipsos poll.

Ipsos provided the one new poll for the week in its monthly outing for the Fairfax papers, and it raised a few eyebrows with its weak primary vote for Labor and extraordinarily strong result for the Greens, the latter exacerbating a long established peculiarity of this pollster. The poll’s addition to the BludgerTrack aggregate takes a certain amount of edge off the recent blowout to Labor, while still finding them on course for a victory of historic dimensions. The BludgerTrack seat projection has Labor down three on last week’s result, with Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia each moving one seat in the Coalition’s favour. The methodological caveats about BludgerTrack from last week’s post continue to apply, as does the fact that I won’t be updating the leadership ratings until the model has a solid enough base of Morrison-era data to work from. Other than that, full results from the link below.

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.

2,598 comments on “BludgerTrack: 54.9-45.1 to Labor”

Comments Page 2 of 52
1 2 3 52
  1. C@t, I was also rude to you and I also apologised. I thought we had a teasing banter that was kind of jocular. Seems I was wrong. I promise never to refer to you in any negative fashion nor to direct you in any way.

  2. zoomster, there are some here, Barney included who berate and belittle others. I know you are not like that hence my apology. But Barney has called me all sorts of things.

  3. There is a good point that private institutions shouldn’t be compelled to be the arbiter of free speech, freedom of speech can essentially be the fact that the government don’t prosecute you for speech. In practice and in law this freedom is limited of course.

    But another point is that as satisfying as it might be to knock down arguments that seek to compel private citizens or organisations to act in any way (for e.g. requiring universities to give someone like Milo a platform) when such arguments are offered by those who would otherwise shriek loud and long about libertarianism, remember that we do compel private citizens in all sorts of ways for the public good. We require services to be provided without discrimination for instance.

  4. That’s all good then, nath. 🙂

    We are women here who value our ability to demonstrate that we are of independent mind. And damn the torpedoes! 😀

  5. Darn

    It would be stupid of me to waste my time listening to people who, over the years, have proven that they’re not worth listening to. I’m not going to fill my days listening to the numpties on SKY, for example, just so I can refute their arguments. I’m capable of doing that without listening to them.

    Likewise, if someone has something objectionable to say, I have the right to try and stop them, particularly if what they are saying is hurtful in some way. Knowing women who were raped on campus, I would think someone telling them it wasn’t really an issue would be incredibly damaging.

    Ideologies such as complete freedom of speech are fine in a completely rational world. They don’t work in a human one, where no one is completely rational and emotions can’t be turned on or off like a light switch.

    Freedom of speech arose in a society where saying to your mates after a couple of drinks down the pub that you thought a new tax was unfair led to you being hung from the nearest gallows. One guy lost his arm for suggesting that Queen Elizabeth I was too old to have children. It’s about being able to question those in power, not about spouting whatever ideas you want to just for the sake of it.

  6. @BrettMason tweets

    Labor Senator @Louise_Pratt: “The Greens are moving a motion of no confidence in Peter Dutton, which Labor will support. I would call on the cross bench to consider the findings of our (senate) inquiry, which showed that Minister Dutton misled parliament.” #auspol @SBSNews https://twitter.com/BrettMasonNews/status/1042541638701146112/photo/1

    “There’s a legitimate public interest in whether the Minister behaved appropriately in this case” #auspol @SBSNews

    “It’s simply unfair that people get special access to Ministerial Intervention because they’re party donors or they’ve got historical connections, while thousands of other people wait in the queue with worthy cases calling for Ministerial Intervention” #auspol @SBSNews

  7. As to the question of right-wing visitors to Uni’s I am kinda torn.

    On the one hard it would be good to have all kinds of debate allowed but I also understand the anger at having some views come into your ‘space’. I had a friend who was at RMIT many years ago and Andrew Bolt came to debate an academic. There were a lot of protests and I sympathised with them because he is such a dangerous and misanthropic hack .

  8. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/sep/20/ama-president-calls-for-urgent-transfer-of-refugee-families-from-nauru

    The president of the Australian Medical Association has urged Scott Morrison to take urgent action to remove families and children from Nauru, preferably to the Australian mainland, to safeguard their physical and mental health.

    In a letter to Morrison from Dr Tony Bartone, seen by Guardian Australia, the AMA president says the medical profession is “demanding a change of policy” in recognition that the situation on Nauru is now “a humanitarian emergency requiring urgent intervention”.

  9. Took the words out of my mouth, Peter.

    Peter van Onselen‏Verified account @vanOnselenP · 14h14 hours ago

    So the new PM has a trophy of an asylum boat to remind him that he stopped them, a flag pin to remind him who he serves. What next…a picture of himself on his desk to remind him who he is?

  10. Research from the Museum of Australian Democracy and University of Canberra:

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-20/in-a-nation-of-cynics-we-are-flocking-to-the-fringe/10281522

    Poll after poll shows satisfaction with the political system has plunged to unprecedented lows, in a nation not exactly known for its patriotic fervour.

    And while Australians may pride themselves on being a cynical bunch, new research has revealed deep divisions between those content with the status quo and a growing underbelly for whom Australian democracy is quickly losing its shine.

    Delving into the differences between more than 20 demographic groups, the research from the Museum of Australian Democracy and University of Canberra found distrust and disillusionment surpassed 80 per cent among some communities, while in others, more than 60 per cent remained happy with the current system.

    So, are you more cynical than a swinging voter? More satisfied than the rich? Or more apathetic than Generation X? To see whether you’re more trusting or cynical than other Australians, take our quiz below. (You’ll need about 2 minutes.)

  11. nath

    Your example is free speech in action. Its not like the protestors blocked him from speaking from the information you give in your anecdote.

    The point is the students are free to say they think the academics got it wrong in picking their guest to speak. Thats free speech in action. In the US it has got ugly because they were literally protesting white nationalists that is white supremacists being given a platform to speak.

  12. zoomster says:
    Thursday, September 20, 2018 at 8:17 am
    …Darn seems to be arguing that the doors of the hall be locked and I’m shackled to a chair with a gag in my mouth. That doesn’t seem anything like any freedom I’ve ever heard of.

    Zoomster

    I’m not sure if you’re just being silly now or whether you just misinterpreted my post. I was not suggesting that the student mob should have been forced to attend Arndt’s presentation. I was simply saying they should have left her alone to give it.

    If they wanted to be involved in the debate, intimidation, bullying and violence was not the way to go about it.

  13. So one guy whose daddy died and left him a huge amount of money that he then multiplied largely by being an arsehole got targeted by another guy whose daddy died and left him and even huger amount of money that he then multiplied largely by being an even bigger arsehole so that the first arsehole got dumped from the job he was never any good at and only wanted in order to convince himself he was something more than the arsehole he is?

    I have to admit I’m struggling to find even a Planck’s Fuck to give you Lucien.

    The are lots of people suffering injustice in this story. You ain’t one of them.

  14. Alastair Nicholson‏ @alasnich · 15m15 minutes ago

    It is interesting how politicians like Morrison bang the law and order drum while showing a cynical disregard of whether their actions are effective or even sensible. The law is simply used as a stunt to further their ambitions.

  15. Hannah Ryan‏ @HannahD15 · 19h19 hours ago

    Administering poison: 7 years
    Abduction for a sexual purpose: 10 years
    Organ trafficking: 12 years
    Sticking a needle in a strawberry: 15 years

  16. Fess

    If we get to QT. I do hope Bandt brings his motion on during QT or just before so eyeballs are the highest viewing.

    If just before the Speaker won’t have punted members under 94a.

    We could really see the end of the government today. Unlikely but possible. 🙂

  17. Guytaur there is surely a spectrum, your reductio ad absurdam argument is flawed so long as Bettina Arndt doesn’t propose a global campaign of violent terrorism aimed at installing a totalitarian theocratic order worldwide.

  18. https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/law-to-address-one-of-the-great-dark-sins-of-our-time-20180919-p504ob.html

    Thousands of Queensland survivors of institutional child sexual abuse will be able to access counselling, compensation and a personal response after a redress bill passed the State Parliament with bipartisan support.

    The legislation will allow the National Redress Scheme to operate in Queensland and non-government institutions in the state to opt in and participate.

    And I hope the cost is taken out of the institutions responsible for the damage.

  19. Likewise, if someone has something objectionable to say, I have the right to try and stop them, particularly if what they are saying is hurtful in some way. Knowing women who were raped on campus, I would think someone telling them it wasn’t really an issue would be incredibly damaging.

    Zoomster

    I can see where you are coming from and I genuinely sympathise with the women of whom you are speaking. But I think it is the method of dealing with the situation over which we disagree. I find anything involving a mob mentality just unacceptable.

    It’s a difficult one for sure. Just what constitutes free speech is probably a debate that will go on for all time.

  20. lizzie @ #71 Thursday, September 20th, 2018 – 8:51 am

    Hannah Ryan‏ @HannahD15 · 19h19 hours ago

    Administering poison: 7 years
    Abduction for a sexual purpose: 10 years
    Organ trafficking: 12 years
    Sticking a needle in a strawberry: 15 years

    Completely ridiculous.

    But, while we have a reference previously to Max Planck – and further back multiple universes we may as well have some sound legal information to help us all.

    “To my mind,” observed the Chairman of the Bench of Magistrates cheerfully, “the only difficulty that presents itself in this otherwise very clear case is, how we can possibly make it sufficiently hot for the incorrigible rogue and hardened ruffian whom we see cowering in the dock before us. Let me see: he has been found guilty, on the clearest evidence, first, of stealing a valuable motor-car; secondly, of driving to the public danger; and, thirdly, of gross impertinence to the rural police. Mr. Clerk, will you tell us, please, what is the very stiffest penalty we can impose for each of these offences? Without, of course, giving the prisoner the benefit of any doubt, because there isn’t any.”

    The Clerk scratched his nose with his pen. “Some people would consider,” he observed, “that stealing the motor-car was the worst offence; and so it is. But cheeking the police undoubtedly carries the severest penalty; and so it ought. Supposing you were to say twelve months for the theft, which is mild; and three years for the furious driving, which is lenient; and fifteen years for the cheek, which was pretty bad sort of cheek, judging by what we’ve heard from the witness-box, even if you only believe one-tenth part of what you heard, and I never believe more myself—those figures, if added together correctly, tot up to nineteen years—”

    “First-rate!” said the Chairman.

    “—So you had better make it a round twenty years and be on the safe side,” concluded the Clerk.

    Raining in Newcastle this morning. Temperature about 14℃. ☮☕

  21. Just been looking at the price of Sydney train fares. For me to purchase a single ticket to go from Central to Redfern it will cost me $4.40. Each way! I am assuming that includes my own personal cabin and butler service.

  22. Shiftaling

    Guytaur there is surely a spectrum, your reductio ad absurdan argument is flawed so long as Bettina Arndt doesn’t propose a global campaign of violent terrorism aimed at installing a totalitarian theocratic order worldwide.

    I think Guytaur’s argument would be stronger if he had asked if anti-vaxxers have an automatic right to speak on Australian campuses. I am curious to know if Darn thinks they do.

  23. Bernard Keane on Witness K:

    https://www.crikey.com.au/2018/09/19/labor-has-serious-questions-to-answer-about-witness-k/

    Labor used to be the party that was sceptical of Australia’s intelligence agencies. It’s time for MPs to speak out on their party’s collusion with the cover-up of the Witness K scandal — even if it means admitting Labor’s own culpability in the affair.

    A small number of Labor MPs have begun finding their voice about the outrage of the prosecution of Witness K and Bernard Collaery despite efforts by Labor’s leadership to provide cover for the Liberals’ harassment of the pair. Victorian MP Julian Hill and others raised the scandal in yesterday’s caucus meeting and are set to receive a briefing from shadow Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus on it.

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/sep/18/labor-mp-julian-hill-criticises-witness-k-prosecution

    The Labor MP Julian Hill has implicitly criticised the prosecution of the former spy Witness K and his lawyer, Bernard Collaery, telling caucus colleagues the attorney general has failed to justify his decision to support the legal action.

    Hill raised a number of concerns about the prosecution in the Labor caucus on Tuesday in the first major-party criticism of the controversial case, which centres around the two men blowing the whistle on Australia’s spying on Timor-Leste.

  24. Re QT – I would love to see the packed opposition benches one day and without warning remain completely silent and keeping direct eye contact at whoever is speaking at the despatch box as question after question skewers them. It would throw them off their game so seriously, can you imagine the psychological pressure of the suddenly silent chamber, all attention focused on every word and assessing whether parliament has been misled or standing orders breached in the most legalistic way. They’d lose it completely.

  25. zoomster @ #30 Thursday, September 20th, 2018 – 8:12 am

    ‘Free speech sometimes includes having to listen to things that we don’t like to hear’

    No it does not. There is no freedom at all in being compelled to do something.

    Yeah, this.

    Free speech means you get to say what you want and the State won’t arrest you for it. It doesn’t mean anyone else has to shut up and listen respectfully to what you have to say. It doesn’t mean you’re entitled to any particular platform or venue to do your speech. It doesn’t mean third parties can’t refuse to host, carry, report upon, or reproduce your speech. It doesn’t mean people can’t protest against you, or that by doing so they’re somehow taking away your freedom to speak.

    You can use your mouth to speak whatever words you like. And if you happen to own your own platform or venue, you can use those to carry whatever message you like. That’s it. Nobody else has to listen, and nobody else has to let you use their platform or venue.

    Darn @ #46 Thursday, September 20th, 2018 – 8:30 am

    Perhaps that’s true in a trivial and knit picking kind of way. But if we want to take issue with what someone is going to say it would be rather stupid not to listen to it first.

    Why? It’s fairly obvious that I don’t need to listen to, say, a white supremacist explaining their views to know that I take issue with white supremacy. Some positions are objectively wrong, and no amount of listening changes that.

    What is your basis for suggesting otherwise?

  26. Brilliant ratsak!

    Turnbull didn’t seem to mind news Ltd riding shotgun on operation kill bill for him for years

    The sense of entitlement is breathtaking

  27. guytaur says:
    Thursday, September 20, 2018 at 8:49 am
    Darn

    Until you advocate ISIS members can speak at universities your free speech argument is as dead as the dodo.

    Guytaur

    I can only repeat. Bettina Arndt – the person I was talking about – is neither a racist or a member if ISIS. I have to go out now so I will have to leave it at that.

  28. JW

    The free speech argument is imported from the US. There it has legs due to the 1st Amendment in their Constitution. However even there the White Supremacists have been losing that debate as the principle is applied that was accepted during WWII.

    No Nazis given a free lunch. Same principle is just applied across the board. Thats in the land where free speech is guaranteed in the Constitution. Here where its not the argument is even weaker.

    These people may feel like they are being discriminated against. Fine let them argue discrimination not free speech denial as the fig leaf to preach hate or an ideological position.

  29. “Confessions says:
    Thursday, September 20, 2018 at 9:01 am
    Just been looking at the price of Sydney train fares. For me to purchase a single ticket to go from Central to Redfern it will cost me $4.40. Each way! I am assuming that includes my own personal cabin and butler service.”

    It’s best to buy an OPAL card where the fare is lower. That is, unless you will only make a few trips.

    https://www.opal.com.au

  30. I have a lack of respect for and a lack of trust in any political party which promotes that the most effective form of regulation is self regulation, subscribes accordingly to trickle down economics and promotes and rewards privatisation as we see with monetary incentives offered to State governments for the sale of public assets

    I also seek out government which promotes equality and regulation that enshrines a better balance between citizens, Capital and government

    So, to me, generic questions have no relevance other than to promote further meaningless opinion

    The questions are why and what is the remedy

    I note the trade off to the cross bench in an attempt to progress the tax cuts for Corporate Australia to legislation using Centrelink payments as the trading pawn

    That is a disgrace beyond compare

    And now they announce a Royal Commission into aged care – because of now historical problems in the caring for our ageing citizens in supportive accommodation and on the back of a television program no less

    Having opposed a Royal Commission into the financial services industry – and where, for all that has been revealed, that Royal Commission will only be effective if Hayne accepts the Shorten forced offer of the government for the Commission to (also) consider the public submissions received – and expand the Terms of Reference accordingly

    It is the current Federal government which is dysfunctional and which is the catalyst for the opinion on the status of the political system

    The guilt by association presentation deserves no credit, being designed and resorted to for the reasons it is

  31. When the Catholic University invites or allows a Pro Abortionist to speak to it’s students on campus,or a similar example, only then will I admit that the ‘Free Speech’ warriors have proven their case.

  32. Fess

    If you are travelling in Sydney and are eligible pensioners get to travel the metro area with some few exceptions on all public transport in the metro area for $2.50. One exception is the Jetcat service to Manly.

    Of course if you are on other concessions like Newstart you are out of luck

  33. Malcolm Farr on asylum seeker children held in detention:

    https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/holding-children-indefinitely-in-offshore-detention-is-australias-shame-and-the-world-knows/news-story/59d85254b4a18e46efad53739eb08967

    They are the unwilling trophies of a steely enforcement of the government’s stop-the-boats policy — a role no child deserves.

    The 102 minors held on Nauru now have another function, as global emblems of Australia’s capacity for brutality and unfairness.

    The tolerance of Australians for the abuses of youngsters in the name of border protection will increasingly be tested as more details of their plights emerge.

    We will be confronted by terms such as “resignation syndrome”, a psychiatric disorder that drives a child to abandon all hopes of a better life.

    It is a disorder the Coalition Government and the Labor Opposition will hear more of as medical experts, including the government’s own, list in public the illnesses developing in the wretched conditions on Nauru.

    Underlining the tragedy are reports youngsters have contemplated or attempted suicide as the only means to escape from a detention that in some cases they have endured for half or even all of their lives.

  34. https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/virus-discovery-offers-new-means-of-controlling-queensland-s-cane-toad-20180919-p504og.html

    a team from UNSW Sydney, the University of Sydney, Deakin University, Portugal and Brazil have unlocked the toad’s genetics and say the discovery could lead to a cull of the estimated 200 million cane toad population

    any virus developed in the laboratory would have to be field-tested before a full-scale release to ensure there were no impacts to other native animals.

    Hope!

  35. Guytaur why do you put it in such combative terms? You may feel satisfied with your win however consideration of all arguments dispassionately is of more value.

    I agree that it’s not currently a matter of lawfully ordained “free speech” however the proposal (which is completely misguided in my view- not to mention hypocritical when coming from the libertarian right) appears to be for legislation that require universities to be arbiters of free speech. So the discussion is around legal understanding and protections of free speech.

    Your ISIS argument actually has nothing to do with it as there are limitations to free speech, even – as you have said – in the jurisdiction with the most unambiguous legal language protecting it. It is conceivable that a law could be passed that protected Arndt’s speech but not ISIS’ and therefore your argument is not valid apart from as an argument against complete and untrammelled freedom of speech in all cases which is probably not proposed by anyone.

  36. guytaur:

    I’m not a pensioner or concession.

    In Perth you have a two hour window where you can travel on any train bus or ferry service with just the one ticket. It is much more user-friendly for tourists.

  37. shift

    Its combative because its an unreasonable approach used by White Supremacy in the US.

    The fact is Arndt cannot argue discrimination or thats what she would have run with not the “free speech” fig leaf.

  38. So here we have the nub of the problem…

    Mr Pigot said he made an appeal to the Department of Home Affairs requesting ministerial intervention, but it was rejected.

    “The department didn’t even refer my request to the Minister, so he didn’t get to read it, because we don’t meet the guidelines,” he said.

    Les Pigots are the French couple who have established a coffee shop up the north coast of NSW.

    THEY think they have a good case to stay here as permanent residents. The department does not.

    They would like the minister to examine their case. They have been waiting 2 years.

    But they are not Liberal donors. Nor did they once work with the minister. THEY don’t have the right connections.

    The au pair girls and their employers got same-day service, even on a Sunday. One of them was taken from a flight out of the country as it taxied out for take off. The taxpayers footed the bill for the turnaround.

    Forget whether the minister has the power to overrule his public servants. If he didn’t have the power then no-one would ask him to intervene.

    It’s granting unusual, urgent access to some mates, versus not granting even routine access to ordinary folk that is the nub of this problem.

Comments Page 2 of 52
1 2 3 52

Leave a Reply

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