BludgerTrack: 54.7-45.3 to Labor

After a dire result from Newspoll, the BludgerTrack poll aggregate is hardly better for the Coalition than it was immediately after the leadership coup.

The BludgerTrack poll aggregate has been updated with this week’s Newspoll and the YouGov Galaxy poll from Queensland, the effect of which is to add another half a point to Labor’s two-party preferred vote for a gain of only one seat, that being in Western Australia. The Queensland poll, which was a relatively good result for the Coalition, negated the effect of Newspoll in that state. Newspoll’s leadership ratings resulted in little change in the trend readings – no doubt it would have been a different story if I had a net satisfaction series for Scott Morrison, who did particularly badly in Newspoll, but there is still too little data for that to be feasible.

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.

995 comments on “BludgerTrack: 54.7-45.3 to Labor”

  1. Will Mayhem survive……

    Brexit deal: Labour, Tory hard-Brexiters and DUP line up against May – Politics live

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/nov/13/brexit-deal-within-next-48-hours-still-possible-but-not-at-all-definite-says-lidington-politics-live

    and I like this quip on twitter:

    Simon McGarr@Tupp_Ed
    2h2 hours ago
    More
    Brexit has been 18 months of watching someone trying to haggle on prices with the automatic scanning machine at a Tesco checkout.

  2. Boerwar:

    I watched a doco on Stalin recently. When he died a doctor wasn’t called for a few hours, the implication being that had one been summonsed, he may’ve survived.

  3. meher baba
    says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 9:22 am
    As for the idea of a UBI: if someone can explain to me clearly what they mean by it and exactly problem it is meant to solve, then I might be interested in it. Some economists seem to promote it predominantly as a means of eliminating any possible financial disincentive to work on the part of welfare recipients. But the Greens et al seem to perceive it as a way of providing more income support to people at the bottom of the scale.

    You might have seen those games of soccer robots play? Pretty sad/funny whatching those things stumble about isn’t it? But when you stop and consider they are just little lumps of organised plastic and metal, and that they can actually manage to play, it really is quite a feat. If we look at how the computing power of the Appollo misions is now packed into a mobile phone, it doesn’t take too much imagination to realise it is just a matter of time before those little lumps will be able to give Renaldo and Beckham a run for their money.

    At that point labour (small ‘l’) will have no leverage against capital. And when I say labour, I really mean any human work, including management, and eventually even the creative arts.

    We already have the worldwide problem that wages are not keeping up. We need to get creative about making sure that capital isn’t the only thing that determines well-being.

  4. nath: “Citing Kelly’s The End of Certainty, would be much better.”

    I bought a copy of The End of Certainty and have tried to read it many times, but have tended to find myself drifting off in the first few pages.

    I have a similar problem with Kelly’s articles. The guy has made a career out of stating the bleeding obvious in dense prose.

    I’m not as big a fan of George Mega as some on this blog but his books on the Hawke-Keating era – especially The Longest Decade – are infinitely better than Kelly’s IMO.

  5. Report in ‘The Hill’ today that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced he will make a decision in January or February whether to seek the Democratic Party’s 2020 Presidential nomination.

  6. Tom

    You don’t have to agree with me. My argument is sound however. Remember Keating’s Super was not the Super we have today.

    Posting the definition of neo liberalism does not mean I was arguing Super is neo liberal.

  7. Mavis Smith says: Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 11:11 am

    PhoenixRed:

    [“He’s furious,” an administration official said. “Most staffers are trying to avoid him.”]

    A furious Trump is an unpredictable Trump, making him more vulnerable, and who would be absolutely livid about losing the House, even though he claimed the mid-terms to be an unmitigated success.

    *****************************************************************

    Ex-CIA director terrified by Trump ‘brooding and sulking’ and warns these are ‘extremely dangerous times’

    Appearing on MSNBC’s “Deadline: White House” on Tuesday, former CIA Director John Brennan worried about President Donald Trump’s mental state.

    Brennan wondered about Trump’s state-of-mind during a conversation about special counsel Robert Mueller and Democrats winning the House of Representatives in the midterm elections.

    “I wonder whether or not what we’ve seen over the last couple days — both in France as well as here in the United States — that Mr. Trump is brooding and sulking, and really concerned and quite anxious,” Brennan noted. “Who knows what’s going on behind-the-scenes and whether or not he’s withdrawing because of the result of the pressure that he’s feeling — which is dangerous for someone who holds the office of the presidency to feel that they are under assault from the Department of Justice.”

    I must tell you that the President of the United States is having some real issues to deal with and it may manifest itself on the global stage in some unsettling ways,” Brennan concluded.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/11/ex-cia-director-terrified-trump-brooding-sulking-warns-extremely-dangerous-times/

  8. From this morning’s Guardian blog:

    The IPA is VERY happy with the Robert French review into freedom of speech at universities.

    Dan Tehan announced it this morning:

    Former chief justice of the high court Robert French will review existing material regarding free speech, including codes of conduct, enterprise agreements, policy statements and strategic plans.

    The review will:

    Assess the effectiveness of the Higher Education Standards Framework (the Standards) to promote and protect freedom of expression and freedom of intellectual inquiry in higher education.

    Assess the effectiveness of the policies and practices to address the requirements of the Standards, to promote and protect freedom of freedom of expression and intellectual inquiry.

    Assess international approaches to the promotion and protection of free expression and free intellectual inquiry in higher education settings, and consider whether any of these approaches would add to protections already in place in the Australian context.

    Outline realistic and practical options that could be considered to better promote and protect freedom of expression and freedom of intellectual inquiry, including revision/clarification of the Standards and development of a sector-led code of conduct.”

    And the IPA responded with approval:

    “Australia’s universities are failing to live up to their moral and legal duty to safeguard free expression,” said Matthew Lesh, Research Fellow with the IPA.

    “The French review is an important commitment to free intellectual inquiry by the Morrison government.

    “… From the sacking of Peter Ridd by James Cook University to the multitude of policies that prevent speech merely because it might be offensive, our universities have failed in their mission,’ Mr Lesh said.

    “Free speech is fundamental to what it means to be a university, it is fundamental to undertaking research and ensuring students can grow intellectually with a full understanding of the arguments.”

    _____________________________________

    Like including superannuation in the banking royal commission and the Ruddock review of religious freedom, this will be a beautiful exposure of how far the far right have travelled from reality.

    No doubt driven by the difficulties the Ramsay Western Culture centre has had in establishing a parasite colony in any highly regarded university it can find, the IPA think it will expose Australian universities as seething cesspits of Marxist culture. I think they will get a huge shock when the report comes out.

    Unlike Heydon, who was an outlier on the High Court, but like Hayne, French is nobody’s puppet.

  9. Prof.Higgins: “Report in ‘The Hill’ today that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced he will make a decision in January or February whether to seek the Democratic Party’s 2020 Presidential nomination.”

    He’d probably make quite a good President, but I can’t really see him attracting much of the Trump white male constituency over to the Dems, nor – being the cosseted plutocrat that he is – will he be likely to stimulate a high turnout among the younger “feel the Bern” mob or among the African-Americans and Hispanics of the southern part of the US.

    As they say in racing parlance, others preferred.

    My personal view, which is probably not shared by too many on this blog, is that Trump is going to be incredibly hard to beat in 2020. The Dems’ best chance is probably that he might decide at some point during the Republican primaries that he’s had enough fun and announce that he’s giving it away.

  10. TPOF @ #146 Wednesday, November 14th, 2018 – 11:32 am

    Wikipedia is incredibly useful, but it is not a source. Wikipedia is, rather, an anonymous collective essay in real time. Entries can, and are, edited in a moment without prior supervision.

    Nobody could quote a classmate’s essay in their assignment (even with attribution). Quoting Wikipedia is the same.

    Different here, though, if you want to supply some facts to support an argument. Nobody is officially marking and any rewards are purely in the realm of self-satisfaction or self-gratification.

    You have missed the point.

    You don’t quote Wikipedia in a University assignment.

    Wikipedia is a resource where somebody else has done all the research for your assignment, and found all the relevant references.

    You then look up the references, and quote the apposite parts of those, or summarise them, and give the reference.

    And in any case, Wikipedia is invaluable for all sorts of other reasons. Most of us are not writing Uni essays any more, but may need Wikipedia to find the capital of an obscure country or its population, or to resolve a dispute over how many gun deaths occurred in Australia since the introduction of Howard’s laws.

  11. Don

    You have missed the point.

    ______________________________

    Apart from that line, I agree with everything else you posted. As for that line, I thought the issue was quoting Wikipedia in academic assignments (other than ones dealing with Wikipedia).

  12. Holden Hillbilly
    says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 9:17 am
    UBI – $160 billion a year in extra taxes.
    Every year.
    Every taxpayer would pay $200 a week extra to pay the unemployed/retired in society to live the standard of those with current jobs.
    Those who are happy to do that step forward.

    The UBI is a mechanism, like taxation, universal health, the pension, carbon pricing etc. The levels at which you settle on are completely arbitrary, and can be implemented incrementally. There is no set cost.

    You could start by tapering the amount workers receive so that there is no obstacle to entering the workforce, but that it tapers out when you reach an arbitrary income.

    I would regard removing all the inefficient and time wasting compliance costs that people on the dole are currently forced to go through as an incremental step toward a UBI.

    As automation and AI ramps up, it will leverage all sorts of productivity gains that will add to our collective wealth and make even your numbers look insignificant. The question is, do we share this technological bounty, or allow it to stratify society even further?

  13. phoenixRed:

    [‘I must tell you that the President of the United States is having some real issues to deal with…’]

    With Trump losing the House, they’ll compound. He’s so accustomed to getting his way, he’ll go even more feral, until maybe the 25th is invoked. We can only hope. Reading the article you posted, it does seem that the stress of the office he holds is getting to him. He’ll be 73 in June, an age at which most are past their cognitive prime, and more likely to suffer mental health disorders, such as depression, anxiety.

  14. meher baba says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 11:50 am

    nath: “Citing Kelly’s The End of Certainty, would be much better.”

    I bought a copy of The End of Certainty and have tried to read it many times, but have tended to find myself drifting off in the first few pages.

    I have a similar problem with Kelly’s articles. The guy has made a career out of stating the bleeding obvious in dense prose.

    I’m not as big a fan of George Mega as some on this blog but his books on the Hawke-Keating era – especially The Longest Decade – are infinitely better than Kelly’s IMO.
    ________________________________________
    I found it to be a lot better than his articles. It is an interesting book in that it provides both a pretty good summary of political events during those times but also becomes a primary source at times because of Kelly’s membership of the gallery in Canberra. So it at times is both a secondary and primary source document depending upon what Kelly is discussing.

  15. Q

    ‘You could start by tapering the amount workers receive so that there is no obstacle to entering the workforce, but that it tapers out when you reach an arbitrary income.’

    In which case it is not a UBI.

  16. Mavis Smith

    When Trump is making up stuff, he always looks confident, although his tone says it’s ‘so sad’ that everyone except him is so evil. When his face is off duty, I think he just looks bad-tempered. 🙂

  17. Antony Green
    ‏@AntonyGreenABC
    2h2 hours ago

    My upper house calculators will be out today. From testing, my view is that it is disgraceful that Victoria still uses an electoral system where votes from people are sent on a magical mystery tour across the ballot paper to elect candidates nobody has hear of. #vicvotes

  18. BW,

    Only from an absolutist POV. As I said, these things can be done incrementally.

    I would want it to become universal, but that isn’t necessarily a priority. I would be happy to do it in stages as the economic benefits of robots grows.

  19. Not a happy place to be on Dotard’s Staff – even Melania is getting people fired!

    “First lady’s office said in a statement that Mira Ricardel, deputy to national security adviser John Bolton, did not belong in the White House anymore. While it didn’t elaborate, The Wall Street Journal reported that the president had decided to fire Ricardel at Melania Trump’s urging after clashes regarding her recent solo trip to Africa.

    And earlier in the day, Trump’s chief economic adviser, Larry Kudlow, lashed out at White House trade adviser Peter Navarro after Navarro, a trade protectionist, took aim at Wall Street and corporate influencers pushing a less aggressive stance against China. Navarro did Trump a “great disservice,” Kudlow told CNBC.

    “Peter very badly misspoke,” he added. “He was freelancing.”

    White House aides and advisers have long anticipated an internal staff reckoning once the uneasy truce broke and the dust settled after the elections. But some conceded that the drumbeat of exits, the threat of subpoenas from the Russia probe and anticipated investigations by a newly empowered Democratic House — along with a raft of negative media attention in recent days — were taking a heavy toll on not only the president, but also on the aides and advisers’ thinning ranks.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/13/trump-staffers-white-house-989243

  20. Yes today is the day Joseph Stieglitz is speaking at the National Press Club.

    Nobel winning economist who praised Labor for its GFC response for those still in the dark. 🙂

  21. Q
    You either have a UBI or you having something else.
    You might want to work towards to a UBI but until you get there, you don’t have a UBI.
    That is not ‘purism’.
    It is a statement of fact.

  22. lizzie:

    Agree, and living with him must be torture. Little wonder his wife prefers to live in New York rather than than with him in the WH. It may be a long bow to draw, but he shares a number of personal characteristics with Stalin.

  23. BW,

    I suggested incremental change and gave 2 incremental examples. You can’t complain about Green ‘purity’, and then complain about practical changes toward a desired outcome.

    My desired outcome would be a UBI.

  24. Steve777
    says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 12:35 pm
    Josep Stiglitz is giving today’s National Press Club address, being broadcast on the ABC.
    ___________________________________
    Everyone in the German army has heard of Joseph Stiglitz

  25. ‘Question says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 12:34 pm

    BW,

    I suggested incremental change and gave 2 incremental examples. You can’t complain about Green ‘purity’, and then complain about practical changes toward a desired outcome.

    My desired outcome would be a UBI.’

    A UBI is universal. When some intervention is not universal, it is not a UBI.

  26. Question @ #156 Wednesday, November 14th, 2018 – 10:48 am

    meher baba
    says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 9:22 am
    As for the idea of a UBI: if someone can explain to me clearly what they mean by it and exactly problem it is meant to solve, then I might be interested in it. Some economists seem to promote it predominantly as a means of eliminating any possible financial disincentive to work on the part of welfare recipients. But the Greens et al seem to perceive it as a way of providing more income support to people at the bottom of the scale.

    You might have seen those games of soccer robots play? Pretty sad/funny whatching those things stumble about isn’t it? But when you stop and consider they are just little lumps of organised plastic and metal, and that they can actually manage to play, it really is quite a feat. If we look at how the computing power of the Appollo misions is now packed into a mobile phone, it doesn’t take too much imagination to realise it is just a matter of time before those little lumps will be able to give Renaldo and Beckham a run for their money.

    At that point labour (small ‘l’) will have no leverage against capital. And when I say labour, I really mean any human work, including management, and eventually even the creative arts.

    We already have the worldwide problem that wages are not keeping up. We need to get creative about making sure that capital isn’t the only thing that determines well-being.

    Read “Why the Future is Workless” by Tim Dunlop. Not sure if I’m totally persuaded yet but he makes some powerful arguments. Interestingly one of the possible outcomes is a big increase in the bargaining power of labour.

  27. BW,

    I would also like net zero emissions. By your logic, if I settle on a intermediate mechanism that only halves emissions (or an ETS that doesn’t include agriculture) I may as well not bother.

  28. Interesting ajm,

    I’m not sure how that would work, in the short term anyway? I suppose if we all get used to the robots doing everything, then labour may become something we do in the same way people go to the gym for exercise 🙂

  29. ‘Question says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 12:51 pm

    BW,

    I would also like net zero emissions. By your logic, if I settle on a intermediate mechanism that only halves emissions (or an ETS that doesn’t include agriculture) I may as well not bother.’

    Ludicrous strawman accompanied by a false inference.

    We will have zero net emissions when we have zero net emissions. Until then we will not have zero net emissions. UBI ditto.

    A UBI in Australia will cost something like 20,000,000 people @ something like $20,000 per annum. That is to say, $400 billion. That is a UBI. Everyone gets it. Regardless.

    Giving $20,000 per annum to 5,000,000 people is not a UBI.

  30. @BW

    And yet we give shit loads of money to big corporations and unions 😛

    $20,000 is fuck all to live on excluding economy changes.

    Go fucking figure.

  31. Question @ #191 Wednesday, November 14th, 2018 – 11:54 am

    Interesting ajm,

    I’m not sure how that would work, in the short term anyway? I suppose if we all get used to the robots doing everything, then labour may become something we do in the same way people go to the gym for exercise 🙂

    I really can’t summarise his whole book here, but the guts of the bargaining power argument as I remember it (read the book a while ago) was that removal of the economic imperative to have continuous work greatly strengthens workers’ options to seek out better wages and conditions, either from their existing employer or a new one.

    Even though an awful lot of what we now call “work” is likely to disappear through the use of technology, there will still be a fair bit of highly skilled work to be done and the removal of the economic imperative to do mechanisable work will probably create whole new areas of human activity, some of which may be organised in a similar way to what we now call “work”.

  32. My way to handle the UBI going to the ones who were well off while keeping the universal aspect of it, would be to increase taxes.

    For an example of 20,000k UBI that everyone gets and a flat tax of 45cents on all income.

    At 90k they currently pay 20,797. Under this proposal they pay $20,500 taking into account the UBI

    At 180k they currently pay 54,097. With this UBI proposal they pay $61,000.

    By tweaking the tax scales you can easily recover the money without removing the universal part of the UBI.

    It will also mean that income sharing is no longer a way of tax minimization. Every dollar earned is treated exactly the same way for tax purposes.

  33. ajm,

    That makes sense, but we will need to have sorted out a UBI (or something approaching it – for the puritan’s) so that we all reap the benefits.

  34. Prof. Higgins @ #159 Wednesday, November 14th, 2018 – 11:52 am

    Report in ‘The Hill’ today that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced he will make a decision in January or February whether to seek the Democratic Party’s 2020 Presidential nomination.

    From The Guardian:

    Bloomberg to make decision on presidential bid this winter
    In an interview with the Associated Press, former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg said he’ll make a decision on a presidential bid in the coming months.

    “I think January, February would be about as late as you can do it and as early as you can gather enough information,” said Bloomberg.

    Bloomberg spent $110m to help Democrats during the midterms, a figure that represents a mere fraction of the billionaire’s net worth of over $40bn.

  35. ‘Zoidlord says:
    Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 1:03 pm

    @BW

    And yet we give shit loads of money to big corporations and unions

    $20,000 is fuck all to live on excluding economy changes.

    Go fucking figure.’

    IMO a real UBI should be closer to $30,000 than $20,000. The difficulty is that, whatever figure you end up with, you have to multiply it by the adult population.

  36. meher baba @ #164 Wednesday, November 14th, 2018 – 10:59 am

    My personal view, which is probably not shared by too many on this blog, is that Trump is going to be incredibly hard to beat in 2020. The Dems’ best chance is probably that he might decide at some point during the Republican primaries that he’s had enough fun and announce that he’s giving it away.

    I think 2020 is highly unpredictable but I think that a Trump re-election is a very unlikely outcome.

    As the midterm results wash out, it is becoming clearer that there have been some seismic shifts, such as the increased involvement of women and minorities in the US political process,.the attention being paid by the media to election rigging tactics, the existence of the huge background issue of healthcare and the continuation of demographic trends adverse to the Republicans as currently constituted. The trends are no his friends.

    That’s even before considering Trump’s continuing unhingement and the ability of the House to pursue investigations.

Leave a Reply

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