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%.
I assume it was Foley’s political enemies who brought this out in Parliament? He had apologised to the journo and she didn’t want to take it any further. It is men using this as a weapon.
lizzie
says:
Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 1:40 pm
I assume it was Foley’s political enemies who brought this out in Parliament? He had apologised to the journo and she didn’t want to take it any further. It is men using this as a weapon.
______________________
Huh?
lizzie @ #1450 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 1:40 pm
He shouldn’t have lied about it. It’s nearly always the cover up that gets you, not the crime.
Here’s a question folks.
Given that everybody here, other than imacca, has seen this statement purely in political terms, should Foley carry through with his threat and out the Coalition people he earlier warned? After all, if there are more victims of sexual assault who are going to be outed for political purposes, does that matter to anyone here?
“Doesn’t mean we have to leave the State Government in the hands of the agents of Macquarie Bank, miners, developers and other spivs.”
And, its worth noting that Raper was outed on this, when SHE had made what seems to me a considered and rational decision, in her own interests and that of her family, to stay quiet about it, by the NSW Liberal Party, for political reasons.
Regardless of whether anyone agrees or disagrees as to whether her decision was the right one, its her call and her choices should have been respected.
lizzie @ #1451 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 9:40 am
Probably, but then he went back on a commitment to resign which seems to have brought about today.
Apologised to the journo? Oh I’m sorry for putting my hand beneath your underwear.
Oh, never mind Sir, mistakes like that happen all the time.
lizzie @ #1450 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 1:40 pm
True to a point re David Elliott’s conduct.
Foley should never have started this whole mess. He should take responsibility.
TPOF.
No.
He should just resign and go quietly into the sunset in everyone’s best interests.
If others have been up to no good then the ‘victims’ can decide for themselves to take it further.
Ms Raper’s statement
http://about.abc.net.au/statements/statement-8-november-2018/
The only reason the journalist didn’t want to going any further was because she feared what would happen to HER. Not because she cared about Foley, who committed sexual assault and should be locked up.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-08/luke-foley-nsw-labor-leader-abc-harassment-allegations/10432098
And now after the election as well! 🙁
Would any anyone like my advice?
The correct answer is
NO ❗
TPOF @ #1454 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 9:42 am
I have no problem with naming the perpetrators, but not the victims.
Any message that highlights that this sort of action is completely unacceptable can not come soon enough.
Well if Lizzie is OK with him continuing. I mean it’s all just a political plot and if there was a crime committed, well it’s my ALP team and I just want it to go away.
I know this is a political blog, but really it is less about Foley than it is about the victim – and she is a victim – twice over. I suspect worse the second time as she tried to put that single incident behind her.
——————-
True, and an admirable sentiment…. However presumably those ALP jihadis making vacuous comments about the Greens “misogyny” within the last 48 hours based on allegations of sexual harassment within the Greens Party, will now adopt the position that the ALP is a misogynist organisation.
Not a position I would adopt myself – but I’m not a tribalist….
max @ #1465 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 1:48 pm
It will depend on how the ALP deals with the situation.
nath….you really are a nasty little slime mould aren’t you.
max
Who is defending Foley’s actions?
imacca
says:
Thursday, November 8, 2018 at 1:50 pm
Apologised to the journo? Oh I’m sorry for putting my hand beneath your underwear.
Oh, never mind Sir, mistakes like that happen all the time.
nath….you really are a nasty little slime mould aren’t you.
_________________________________
Maybe, but so far have not committed sexual assault on another person.
Probably, but then he went back on a commitment to resign which seems to have brought about today.
That’s his second biggest mistake after being an offensive git in the first place.
Had he just followed through on his commitment to the journalist he would have saved her being publicly identified and a lot of anquish. He might also have retained at least a modicum of respect.
He’d put himself in the position that he needed to make serious amends, made a commitment to make such amends as he could, and then stupidly backed out of that commitment. Almost as shit behaviour as what got him in the mess in the first place.
Naff off nath.
Since the time I was in NSW for the last State Election I have been wondering how Labor could quietly get rid of Foley to improve their chances of winning in 2019.
He should resign today.
If he doesn’t resign a spill motion should be called and he should be voted out as leader.
Foley will be gone by the end of the day. What a fool.
The ABC statement is out now. These statements are not subject to privilege outside the organization within which they are made. In other words, Foley has ample legal recourse if the statement is false. If he does not take legal recourse the public is entitled to draw its own conclusions.
If I was a Liberal politician with a cloudy background, I’d be worried now. Things could get uglier.
BB
1. Norvill is not on trial, nor is her evidence. In fact she had chosen not to pursue the matter. And she will receive no payment if NeesCorp loses.
I note the disparaging picture of Norvill you have painted in your several posts. Countless televant phrases (“she is an actress after all”, “spins a convincing yarn tailored for the audience”, “how date anyone impair…..” ) …. from this post alone.
2. There is no “defence” barrister. This is not a criminal trial.
3. The judge’s well known view, as reported by…….
4. I have written previously to you about the almost universal phenomenom in this area of law, of victim’s (ultimately found to be true victims) perspectives of what happened to them changing over time, as life moves on. Maturing, further life experience, counselling, talking to others, reading newspapers n books, watching drama n docos, legal advice etc etc. all contribute.
You make a big play of Norvill’s changing views of what happened, you attribute deceit to it, and you most colourfully impute to her a range of thoughts and motives (in the 2 large paragraphs beginning “2018”). Yet this is a common phenomenom.
If there is a baddie in this case, it is NewsCorp. After all, they’re the entity whose conduct Rush has filed his case against.
It is noteworthy that he could have joined Norvill to NewsCorp as joint respondent, but he chose not to.
Perhaps he knew all along that PB would take charge of that aspect.
He might also have retained at least a modicum of respect.
________________________________
I’ve been drunk more than few times. So far, have been able to restrain myself from sexually abusing females.
max
Without getting into the details of the various allegations regarding sexual assault – and I’ve never made a comment on that until now – the critical difference is whether the person concerned (and it can be a male) is prepared to pursue the matter or not. Whatever the motive, some of the Greens’s accusers did make formal reports, as did the woman who accused Barnaby Joyce.
My concern is for those people for whom going public is traumatic (and for reasons other than being in the full glare of publicity) and being put out there without consultation, let alone agreement, for political purposes.
As for allegations of sexual harassment and assault, these are human failings, rather than political ones. I don’t go there because people who do it do not conform to any colour, age, gender or political leaning. Although in my experience the biggest moralists are the greatest hypocrites (whether ideologues on the left or the right).
Nath
I’ve been drunk more than few times. So far, have been able to restrain myself from sexually abusing females.
____________________________________
Even if we are to believe you (and why should we?) how do you know? How would you know if your possible victims were too terrified to tell you or anyone who might pull you into line?
And, its worth noting that Raper was outed on this, when SHE had made what seems to me a considered and rational decision, in her own interests and that of her family, to stay quiet about it, by the NSW Liberal Party, for political reasons.
Regardless of whether anyone agrees or disagrees as to whether her decision was the right one, its her call and her choices should have been respected.
__________________________
What a demented post. If we follow this logic NSW could have elected a Premier who when drunk sexually assaults people. Imacca is a fool and dickhead.
Xoanon (AnonBlock)
Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 11:34 am
Comment #1353
Came back after a day and this tedious repetitive anti-Greens nonsense is still going on, and as illogical as ever. Could you at least talk about policies, or something else with substance?
___________________
After you, monsieur.
Go for it!
TPOF
As for allegations of sexual harassment and assault, these are human failings, rather than political ones.
______________________
WHO ARE YOU IMBECILES?
Imacca @1:43PM “Regardless of whether anyone agrees or disagrees as to whether her decision was the right one, its her call and her choices should have been respected.”
Absolutely, it was her decision alone how to proceed. Go to the Police. Lodge an official complaint via her management at the ABC. Or do what she’s done to avoid messy proceedings. All would have been appropriate.
Imacca is a fool and dickhead.
Wow what a badge of honour for you Imacca. So Jelly.
Nath provides its own comment to its own post:
TPOF
As for allegations of sexual harassment and assault, these are human failings, rather than political ones.
______________________
WHO ARE YOU IMBECILES?
______________________________
“What a demented post!”
To be honest, as soon as I read the statement my immediate thoughts were on how this would play out for next year’s election and whether this could be an opportunity in disguise to get an even better leader.
I guess that’s normal if you are a bit of a politics junkie.
Psyclaw, the judge himself expressed skepticism as to Norvill’s interpretation of events by saying he was “grappling” with its logic, as far as Rush’s alleged behaviour was concerned.
Norvill had a chance to remain off the case, anonymous, but instead she agreed to testify as a friendly witness on the Tele’s side. In doing so she completely and voluntarily changed her story: from praise for the production and all associated with it (especially Rush) to utter condemnation of the same group of people and circumstances.
She wasn’t forced to do anything at all, either praise or condemn Rush. The story she told differed according to its audience.
So, who steps up to the plate and replaces Foley as leader?
“I assume it was Foley’s political enemies who brought this out in Parliament? He had apologised to the journo and she didn’t want to take it any further. It is men using this as a weapon.”
Common Lizzie, seriously?
Imagine if it was Tony Burke or some other labor hitman exposing some liberal lies and attempted cover up of sexual harassment. Somehow I doubt you’d be describing it in terms of “men using this as a weapon”.
Now all we need is BB et al to explain to us all how the victim is to blame for not speaking out at the time, and how this is just another case of persecuting old white men.
booleanbach @ #1487 Thursday, November 8th, 2018 – 2:09 pm
A male from the right faction no doubt.
There is no coming back from this. Foley is a twit, he should be gone not just front he front bench, but from the parliamentary party as well. All credibility shot. Aint karma a bitch? Yep, the Greens have issues regarding this type of behaviour, we know the chair sniffing Tories do too, but oh no, the self righteous and deluded amongst us Labor supporters cannot accept that one of our own might have issues too and resent having it rubbed in our faces.
There are so many Kool Aid drinkers on this board.
The attitudes displayed here by Lizzie, TPOF and imacca are a disgrace.
You can bet Bill Shorten will have his backroom henchmen take out Foley
I wonder what the chances are of Foley’s replacement not being a Sussex St stooge of the faceless men of the right? Bugger all I’d say.
Big A
Imagine if it was Tony Burke or some other labor hitman exposing some liberal lies and attempted cover up of sexual harassment. Somehow I doubt you’d be describing it in terms of “men using this as a weapon”.
_________________________________
This is the question I asked earlier about whether Foley should deliver on his threats. Of course, you don’t answer that question, other than to posit a hypothetical cover for a bit of old-fashioned political partisanship.
The fact is that no Labor person in the Federal Parliament has done this. Do you think it’s because there are no cases of it on the conservative side? Pull the other one. It’s called mutually assured destruction.
But it still leaves open the question of re-victimising (often more traumatically) the victims of these actions. Something you can’t bring yourself to address. It looks, however, like you would be happy for Foley to go nuclear on the way out.
Are Sam Dastiyari’s grubby paws back in the Sussex St game?
Nath wrote,
It wouldn’t be the first time THAT has happened.
“Big A”, see my earlier comment at 1.54pm. (and I’d hardly say Foley is “old”).
On the general point, not all “old white men” are innocent, just as not all are guilty. The assumption should not be made either way. Only credible evidence, from credible witnesses can determine that.
I remember when Boerwar posts were insightful and fresh.
this infantile crusade against the greens is ‘boering’ and just shows how the right wing of the labor party still hates the left more than they hate the libs because their agenda is essentially the same. The main difference is that labor right will protect the institution of unions and union power brokers as they more gently/slowly impose thatcherite IR and privatisation laws. Howard claims that Keating got through more ‘reforms’ (ie neo-classical Chicago-school economics) than he ever could have as a lib treasurer. If you want to know why wages and conditions and union memberships are falling and inequality is growing, look to Keating and the labor right. Thank Dog we have the greens to keep labor to the left and challenge the Keating-Howard neo-classical treasury orthodoxy – THAT is the greens main achievement of the past 30 years.
The attitudes displayed here by Lizzie, TPOF and imacca are a disgrace.
_________________________________
Says the poster who claims he has been as drunk as Foley claimed (i.e., so drunk as to not actually remember what they did) but nevertheless asserts unconditionally that they never sexually assaulted anyone.
Personally, I’ll wear the ‘disgrace’ accusation from you. To be called a ‘disgrace’ by the ugliest, meanest and most reprehensible poster here for ages is a badge of honour that I will proudly wear. it could only be better if I was called a disgrace by your hero ‘grab ’em by the pussy’ Trump.