The fortnightly Essential poll — now appearing in Newspoll off weeks, praise be — follows Newspoll in recording Labor’s lead at 54-46, out from 53-47. Monthly personal ratings are better for Scott Morrison than Newspoll in that he remains in net positive territory, but the formerly undecided are breaking heavily against him, with his approval down two to 41% and disapproval up nine to 37%. Bill Shorten maintains his recent improving form, up five on approval to 38% and down one on disapproval to 44% – his second best result from the pollster in the past two years. However, the shift on preferred prime minister is relatively modest, with Morrison’s lead down from 42-27 to 41-29.
Other findings: 44% support Australia becoming a republic in principle, down four since May, with 32% opposed; 61% have a favourable view of Queen Elizabeth, 68% of Prince William, 70% of Prince Harry but only 33% of Prince Charles. The Guardian report is here; the full report from Essential Research, including primary votes, will be with us later today. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1028.
UPDATE: Full report from Essential Research here, and the primary vote shifts are on the high end from what you’d expect out of a one-point shift on two-party preferred: the Coalition is down two to 36%, and Labor up two to 39%, the Greens are steady on 10% and One Nation are down one to 6%.
“You are thinking of the Popular People’s Liberal Party……………………………splitters !”
That would be Cory Bernardi.
Roger
The result now is they are increasingly seen as party for the privileged inner city types who are convinced their political values and priorities should be disproportionately reflected in public policy.
_______________________________
You mean the youngish people in good jobs, leading the cultural economy and with the highest postgraduate levels in the nation. Yeah, let’s exclude them and aim for the prejudices of some yobbo family that lives in an outer suburb.
Marr’s article in the guardian relates to the principal of Shore, Dr Wright, regreting drafting and signing a letter to pressure the government to continue to allow schools to legally discriminate, while at the same time not holding those values personally. More importantly, even though being a smart person, with a doctorate, he didn’t realise he was holding onto those contradictory positions until it was pointed out to him by the school community.
It reminded me of a debate Fry had with some African archbishop on homosexuality. In his arguments, Fry pointed out on a personal basis he and the archbishop got on very well, but then pointed out that archbishop was a senior member of a church that depicted Fry, because he was homosexual, as an evil person to be shunned.
You could see by the look in the archbishop’s face that there was some serious thinking going on inside his head, similar to, what I suspect Dr Write had recently gone through.
Politcal correctness gone mad 😆 Boy Scouts America drop the “Boy” and to “welcome all children”……………..Yaaaaay……………………or is it ?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46119393?ocid=socialflow_twitter&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter
If the police start using Alsatians on crooked bankers, insurance executives and wage theft bosses, then I’ll admire an Alsatian Police Dog.
Until then, police dogs are only there to control the unruly hoi polloi.
Roger @ #1300 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 9:47 am
Have to agree with this. But I would also add that once you would have thought the rise of global warming in the public consciousness would have been accompanied by a rise in the fortunes of the Greens. The reason it has not is that in the same period it became clear that the Greens have much more interest in inner-city social type issues than environmental issues.
That gave them a brief “sugar hit” in popularity, but such issues have only limited appeal with the broader electorate.
When the time comes – and it had better come soon – when the voters start clamouring for genuine action on global warming, it will not be the Greens that springs to mind as the obvious choice.
p
There are 1.8 million girl scouts in the US = big business.
They are protecting ‘their’ client base.
I look forward to the LGBTIQ Scouts joining the action.
The Environmentalists were penetrated by the Far Left Ideologues in a time-honoured front party technique.
Like all ideologues, the Far Left would rather lose than see the Centre Left make genuine social progress or genuine environmental reform.
These folk NEED conflict not solutions.
Therefore the more extreme right wing government is in power, the better they like it.
Even a cursory glance at Greens policies and programs site tells us that they have no real intention of ever forming government.
The result is a politically-intransigent party that achieves nothing for society, nothing for the environment and which spends most of its energies de facto supporting the Right.
Thanks for linking this article BK. It should be a wake up call to all those who think women never lie and should automatically be believed in domestic violence accusations. (not sure if there’s anyone here like that, but they’re definitely out there).
I’m fully in favour of throwing the book at the bastards who bash their female partners, but where the issues of property and custody of the kids are involved there is a big incentive in some cases for a woman to bend the truth and our laws need to be framed in a way that protects BOTH parties from exaggerated or, as in this case, totally manufactured accusations.
Boerwar
They are not used for crowd control here. They are mostly used for their noses. Sometimes they get to stretch their legs chasing some offender who has jumped backyard fences.
I know that these dogs are used on crowds and prisoners in other countries and this, as well as a human rights abuse, is an abuse of the animals. They were originally shepherding dogs and I can say they way Teena watched over my kids, they must have been good ones.
I just want to make sure I understand something.
If a party concentrates its resources on winnable seats, rather than spreading itself too thin to get maximum representation in parliament, that makes them deplorable opportunists. Is that correct?
Does that apply to all parties equally?
Nath said:
“You mean the youngish people in good jobs, leading the cultural economy and with the highest postgraduate levels in the nation. Yeah, let’s exclude them and aim for the prejudices of some yobbo family that lives in an outer suburb.”
No further questions your honor
Puffy
They were used against wharfies. For their teeth.
There is an interesting TED Talk on memory, relevant to the Rush v Telegraph case.
https://www.ted.com/talks/julia_shaw_a_memory_scientist_s_advice_on_reporting_harassment_and_discrimination
and this one which is very interesting.
https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_loftus_the_fiction_of_memory
Boerwar
Yes, I remember that. As I said, an abuse of the wharfies and the dogs. Don’t blame the dogs.
Boerwar,
The problem is not the dog, it is the animal at the other end of the leash. Applies to all dogs.
‘Planned like a murder’: John Dean explains why Trump firing Sessions may be worse than the Saturday Night Massacre
Richard Nixon’s former White House counsel John Dean explained why Donald Trump forcing the resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions may be worse than the Saturday Night Massacre.
In the “Saturday Night Massacre where Nixon relieved special prosecutor [Archibald] Cox,” Dean told CNN’s Jake Tapper in a phone interview, “that was sort of a culmination of disregard for the president’s direction as to not go after his tapes.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/planned-like-murder-john-dean-explains-trump-firing-sessions-may-worse-saturday-night-massacre/
Rod Rosenstein is no longer overseeing Robert Mueller’s probe — and the new acting AG is: report
The Justice Department on Wednesday announced that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is no longer overseeing special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
“Acting Attorney General [Matthew Whitaker] is in charge of all matters under the purview of the Department of Justice,” spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores told the New York Post. Raw Story has reached out to the DOJ for comment.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/rod-rosenstein-no-longer-overseeing-robert-muellers-probe-new-attorney-general-report/
“I just want to make sure I understand something.
If a party concentrates its resources on winnable seats, rather than spreading itself too thin to get maximum representation in parliament, that makes them deplorable opportunists. Is that correct?
Does that apply to all parties equally?”
You seem to have added “deplorable” into my quote…..but otherwise if that lower house strategy detracts from the ideals they purport to pursue, than you betcha they are opportunists.
The Greens politcal party, increasingly identifiable as inner city types who are seen to want to impose their values on everybody else, make sustainable progressive reform harder. And when Labor does the heavier lifting now required to get progressive reform up, this inner city GPP inevitably grand stand and claim credit on Labor’s behalf
Ultimately they are now a party of the bourgeois left that have abandoned (or increasingly never had) solidarity with the poorer people in their society
I give you Nath as a perfect exemplar
phoenixRed:
How do you feel about the midterm results?
‘That’s public corruption’: Ex-FBI officials say we’re seeing ‘obstruction of justice in plain sight’
The removal of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General — and replacement by Matthew Whitaker — appears to be a case of public corruption and obstruction of justice, two former top Federal Bureau of Investigation officials explained on MSNBC’s “Deadline: White House” on Wednesday.
The former Assistant Director for Counterintelligence at the FBI, Frank Figliuzzi, said the move appeared to violate federal law.
“I think we’re watching obstruction of justice play out right in plain sight,” Figliuzzi explained. “I fear there’s a quid pro quo.”
He added, “that’s public corruption.”
Chuck Rosenberg, the former Chief of Staff to the director of the FBI, agreed.
“I think Frank is spot on,” he said.
“I think this adds to the obstruction case, it doesn’t subtract from it,” he concluded.
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/thats-public-corruption-ex-fbi-officials-say-seeing-obstruction-justice-plain-sight/
Ante Meridian @ #1311 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 10:17 am
No, but if a party concentrates its resources on populist issues in winnable seats, while giving only lip service to the issues that are actually important to the electorate, then that makes them deplorable opportunists.
And yes, that does apply to all parties equally.
nath
“You mean the youngish people in good jobs, leading the cultural economy and with the highest postgraduate levels in the nation. Yeah, let’s exclude them and aim for the prejudices of some yobbo family that lives in an outer suburb.”
With that sort of attitude, it’s hard to believe that the Greens have trouble expanding their base. 😛
Boerwar @ #1305 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 10:12 am
Nothing more devious and deceptive than Labor right neo-libs trying to pass themselves off as ‘centre-left’.
nath says:
Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 9:55 am
Roger
The result now is they are increasingly seen as party for the privileged inner city types who are convinced their political values and priorities should be disproportionately reflected in public policy.
_______________________________
You mean the youngish people in good jobs, leading the cultural economy and with the highest postgraduate levels in the nation. Yeah, let’s exclude them and aim for the prejudices of some yobbo family that lives in an outer suburb.
————————————
So which of those groups have the most numbers Nath?
Never thought I’d say Mitt Romney was the voice of reason in the Republican party, but he’s likely the sanest of the lot these days!
Roger,
So the Greens are ” inner city types who are seen to want to impose their values on everybody else”.
Does this mean you are happy those types are not voting Labor?
Whilst I believe the Greens as a political Party have been ineffective and detrimental to their original goals, they do at least try to run a candidate in all electorates.
That to mine gives them more credibility than the Victorian Liberals. 🙂
At ante meridian
No, many “inner city” progressives continue to vote labor even though they know that some of their “post materialist” concerns will generally not be take centre stage over “economic progressive” concerns of the bulk of labor voters.
The G vote will soften for a very simple reason. They campaign against the underlying sensibilities and leanings of their intended supporters. Their supporters – and those the Gs hope to attract – are mostly Labor-positive. The Gs campaign all the time against Labor. By extension, they are campaigning against the values of very many of their supporters. This is self-contradictory for voters. It means they cannot give effect to their core inclinations (to support Labor) and also support the Gs.
By campaigning against Labor, the Gs campaign against themselves.
They do not see it that way, but that is exactly what occurs. The Gs are becoming a legacy party – a rump. They cannot shift their positioning to the centre without wedging themselves, so they remain as a self-conflicted anti-Labor voice on the margins, trying to appeal to voters with pro-Labor sympathies. They’re stuffed, basically.
PuffyTMD
Regarding your earlier posts about memory, numbers 3 and 4 of these Malcolm Gladwell Revisionist History podcasts are terrific (as is the whole series):
http://revisionisthistory.com/seasons?selected=season-3
The Greens are a political party with a set of values and policies that appeal to certain demographics. They seek to win votes, gain elected positions and influence Governments.
Just like all the other parties. In their case, they appeal particularly to well-paid knowledge workers. Their support is widely spread but highest in the inner suburbs of our big cities. They manage to get about 8-12% of the vote, nearly double what the Nationals get.
So being an “inner city progressive” is okay, as long as you vote Labor. Otherwise it’s an insult. Got it.
Oh, and P1.
I too deplore politicians who take up populist issues. Everybody knows that democracy isn’t about doing what’s popular, it’s about doing what’s for the plebs’ own good whether they like it or not.
After 30 years here is the full list of Greens major environmental gains:
Steve777 says:
Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 10:55 am
The Greens are a political party with a set of values and policies that appeal to certain demographics. They seek to win votes, gain elected positions and influence Governments.
Just like all the other parties….
This is true. The interesting bit is in observing how they try to execute this. Considering the ructions on the right and the decay of the Liberal bloc/s, it’s worth asking how come the G vote is also slowly decaying. The reason can be found in their positioning. They have never posed as alt-Lib. They have posed as alt-Labor. This means they cannot benefit from the atrophy of the Lib base while they are also repelling Labor-positive supporters.
For Labor, the prospects are very good. It’s historic plurality is slowly being restored, drawing support from disaffected past G- and Lib-leaning voters.
Democratic politics is all about drawing support together, about building majorities. G and Lib execution has the opposite effect; the effect of repelling support. Labor will be the beneficiaries of this.
I take a day or two off from this main thread to follow the elections for the government of the imperial centre of our Western civilisation, and I see the Labor-Green flame wars have exploded again.
Sigh.
Michael A says:
Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 11:07 am
I take a day or two off from this main thread to follow the elections for the government of the imperial centre of our Western civilisation, and I see the Labor-Green flame wars have exploded again.
Sigh.
It’s not a flame war. It’s a discussion about the determination of majorities in coming elections in Victoria and nationally. There is one party that can offer a majority government- Labor. Other parties are trying to obstruct that. Inevitably, the campaign tactics used by Labor’s competitors become relevant. At the moment, both the Gs and the Liberals are campaigning against themselves as much as they’re trying to campaign against Labor. This is interesting, but it’s not bludger-war.
Ex NSA – John SchindlerVerified account @20committee
We all knew the Mueller inquiry was entering its decisive phase after the midterms. Trump is just crassly moving the timetable up. Mueller anticipated all this. Data has been shared. IC has backups of their stuff. Trump can’t make it stop altogether. But he appears to be trying.
Just got a terse message from the same friend who sent me this some time ago . ( just got an EM fm senior IC friend, it began: “He will die in jail.”now we go nuclear. IC war going to new levels. )
Three words: Fuck this guy.
Michael A
Family feuds are never pretty.
If this comes up multiple times I apologise, my comments seem to have thrown a wobbly
Only in the USA….
https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/world/2018/11/08/dead-dennis-hof-elected-midterms/
Wendy Touhy in the SMH again misses the point.
Her line is to accept in full both the story and claimed motivations of Eryn Norvill, and to work from there.
Once Eryn Norvill’s story is accepted as true, and her interpretations of Geoffrey Rush’s intentions are accepted as correct then Rush becomes a workplace sexual harasser, using his high position in the Australian theatrical hierarchy (itself also condemned as complicit) to prey upon innocent young females for the purposes of sexual gratification.
The possibility that Norvill’s story may NOT be true or that, if superficially true, her interpretation of Rush’s intentions may not be accurate, does not enter Touhy’s head. The ramifications of this go far. According to Touhy:
* At best, Rush has no idea of how to behave in a modern workplace. At worst he is a serial sexual harasser.
* Norvill’s early reluctance to make a formal complaint now becomes the terrified act of a powerless young girl afraid of bring crushed by the cruel industry in which she has chosen to work. A minor incident worth a mention over drinks had now become a ritual humiliation that has devastated the young actress, and condemned an entire industry. Exaggerated? Touhy refuses to even consider exaggeration as a possibility.
* Implicit in the last point is that the entire industry itself is corrupt, and condones and covers up sexual bastardization in the workpkace.
* With Touhy being astonished that anyone could possibly doubt Norvill’s word, the fact that the judge is having trouble accepting it shows that the legal system itself is also condoning Rush’s behaviour.
For Norvill to be right, the entire legal and theatrical industries have to be wrong, and all the witnesses who supported Rush’s story, including eye witnesses of high repute, are liars.
For her part Norvill has ONE corroborative witness, whose story is confused as to details, and who admits his memory needed jogging before he was able to recall the incident during rehearsal. Even then his story was different to Norvill’s in an important detail, and he can only remember a joke by Rush, not collective collusion in ritual sexual humiliation.
Even Norvill herself (supposedly after all this harassment and humiliation had taken place) told the Daily Telegraph that one of Rush’s most likeable features was his sense of humour, his playfulness. This contradictory opinion is explained away as a white lie, for the good of the production, the colleagues, the theatre and the industry which she now condemns, for the same reasons she once praised them.
No wonder the judge is “grappling” with Norvill’s story.
Touhy states that Norvill did not want to tell it. Touhy (as others have done) implies that Norvill had to be dragged kicking and screaming into court by the Daily Telegraph, reluctant to the end. Yet she was a DEFENCE witness, not a hostile witness. She went to court in aid of the Tele’s case, not in opposition to it. As a result, Norvill’s publicly stated appreciation of Rush’s sense of humour and of his skill as an actor, mentor and friend, and her mild, informal complaint to a friend in STC admin turned into the toil and trouble of ritual humiliation at the hands of an entire industry in general and the perverted, geriatric gropings of one of it most respected stars in particular.
Of course it might all be true, but unlike Touhy, I find it quite easy to believe that the judge is having trouble accepting it. Apart from not just believing everything that every witness before him says, there are several inconsistencies that need more explanation than “Australia needs to get a wriggle-on regarding this #metoo stuff.”
Perhaps, if the Tele had bothered to check the story in the first place, they might not have printed it at all.
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/why-is-it-ej-norvill-s-honesty-that-appears-to-be-on-trial-20181107-p50el8.html
The last time the Liberals sat out an election in inner Melbourne, Batman in March 2018, Labor increased its margin against the Greens from 2 percentage points to 9 points. Somehow I don’t think the Liberals’ bid to assist the Greens is going to help.
briefly says:
Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 11:13 am
“It’s not a flame war. It’s a discussion about the determination of majorities in coming elections in Victoria and nationally. There is one party that can offer a majority government- Labor. Other parties are trying to obstruct that. Inevitably, the campaign tactics used by Labor’s competitors become relevant. At the moment, both the Gs and the Liberals are campaigning against themselves as much as they’re trying to campaign against Labor. This is interesting, but it’s not bludger-war.”
————————————-
That aspect of the discussion is a fruitful and important evaluation of the overall positioning of the three major parties vying for votes in the coming election, that is true.
But those contributions from “Nath” are just an exercise in rhetorically pitting one group in the left-of-centre support base against another. It suggests that the divergence in their perspectives is more fundamental than their common interest: repelling the Right’s stoking of fear and hatred, done by the Right to cover for their theft of the country’s common resources, both present and future, to indulge the extravagant lifestyles of the privileged 5%.
It is tiresome wedge stuff that only plays to the advantage of the Right in their divide-and-conquer playbook. We’ve all seen it 1000 times before. Hence the sigh.
Ante Meridian @ #1334 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 10:59 am
I didn’t say ‘popular’, I said ‘populist’
There’s a difference.
The Greens seem hopelessly conflicted. Do they want to be party of the left or a party of the centre right. They stopped wanting to be a party for the environment years ago.
“Craig Kelly confirmed on Wednesday evening that he would become a regular on Sky’s Outsiders political graveyard for the terminally incoherent,threatening to appear once a week.”
I guess he’ll have time on his hands for this kind of thing. Has he officially lost pre-selection yet for Hughes?
Phil Coorey has stated that another sitting Lib MP (Craig Laundy/Reid) is not contesting the next election. Does anyone know if this has this been confirmed?
P1,
You bet there’s a difference. If I agree with it, it’s popular. If I disagree, it’s populist.
Pretty sure it’s unconfirmed at this stage kakuru, but Laundy is about the least stupid animal in the Liberal Partyroom. He knows he’s stuffed and he knows he’s surrounded by idiots. It would a be shock if he didn’t throw in the towel. Why embarrass himself for these dopes when he can just go back to making millions running Dad’s pubs?