At last, a statewide Victorian poll result – and it suggests the betting markets might have been on to something in their move to Labor. The YouGov Galaxy poll for the Herald Sun gives Labor a 53-47 lead on two-party preferred, which compares with a result of almost exactly 52-48 in 2014. The two parties are reportedly both on 40% of the primary vote – as Kevin Bonham observes, this would be more indicative of a result of 54-46, which raises the possibility (though by no means the certainty) the the Greens are down. More to follow. UPDATE: Actually, the Greens are a solid 11%. Daniel Andrews leads Matthew Guy as preferred premier by 47-35.
UPDATE: In a spirit of long-awaited buses arriving all at once, The Age has a uComms/ReachTEL poll, conducted yesterday evening from 1239 respondents, which concurs with YouGov Galaxy in recording something of a Labor blowout. Labor leading 39% to 36% on the primary vote, with the Greens on 10.4%, which converts into 54-46 on two-party preferred, presumably on the basis of respondent-allocated preferences. Nothing further on the primary vote yet, but Labor leads 53-47 as best party on population and 56.6-43.3 on cost of living (The Age report seems inconsistent in its approach to rounding), while the Coalition leads 52-48 on crime.
Observer,
So if the Liberals win a future election and decide to privatise the water treatment facilities, that’s okay by you? And does that apply to every Coalition policy? Just so we know which side you’re on.
Ante Meridian
“That’s not too cynical at all. Labor tried the same ploy last time – to weaken the Greens by denying them preferences and electing micros instead. It did indeed cost the Greens a couple of seats, but the trouble was that it resulted in Liberal + Greens having a majority while Labor + Greens didn’t. So Labor had to deal with the Greens and micros, not Greens or micros.”
————————————————–
Ah yes political spite seems to have been the over-riding motivation and practice for both Lib and Lab in Australia. More important to be seen to “win” based on some infantile criteria about the “others”, rather than using any of our so-called intelligence to aim for the best results for our society.
As pointed out by max, one needn’t even look any further than this very thread to find it in action.
More important to try and always have the last word and throw as much BS into the debate as possible. Screaming all about it all being the “others” fault, rather than recognize or acknowledge what is best and most desired by the public. For Libs, it’s all labors fault, for Labs, it’s all the Greens fault. Same level of puerile rubbish.
If it wasn’t so pathetic and real for the Australian public and environment, it would be great grist for some comedy and satire.
The Greens are the Baldricks of politics. Lots of cunning plans that never amount to anything.
Rocket rocket: In our upstairs bar, we have a selection of 14 differently named but remarkably similar micro-sausage offerings which all sound a bit dodgy. “Sustainable Sausage Future”, “Australian Lamb Alliance” There are lots of nasties hidden in these!
If you choose one of these, you must go through all of them in an order determined by a bloke who was paid to sequence them before you are allowed to have one of the 3 main varieties.
I am just super disappointed in the Herald Sun. You can guess the headline if the ALP proposed selling off the sewerage treatment facility: Sh*t Deal!
The Greens Plan is to spend three years sticking the slipper into Labor and the rest of the time insisting that Labor must preference the Greens for the good of Labor.
The Greens definition of ‘irony’: ‘something that rusts on’.
Murdoch looks on the bright side of a Labor win in Victoria:
“Minority pain for federal Labor
The last thing Bill Shorten needs in Victoria is a Labor minority government dependant on a vocal Greens party.” (Oz headline)
…. and no surprise to hear the Murdoch faction on PB singing from the same song sheet. Schlock horror!
https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2018/11/2018-victorian-final-polls.html
2018 Victorian Final Polls
Pending Newspoll my seat model is at 48-36-3-1.
Could do with a few feathers:
https://www.moonofalabama.org/
@Roger (and to any one else confused, including anyone who might have responded to me and I haven’t read their comment – time is limited).
I am not defending the Labor decision to give us a shitty, undemocratic voting system.
I am interpreting their decision from a perspective of their self-interest.
In case it wasn’t clear from my earlier post on the matter, I do not like it. I hated it the day it was put in, and I hate it today. We haven’t had a democratic choice for our legislative council since nominally proportional voting and a nominal STV were introduced. If I had my druthers, we’d use the Tasmanian system and perhaps people would pay more attention to their counsellors and we would get good ones.
@Ante Meridian, in the same spirit, I’m not calling the result a good thing. I’m calling the result a result that might please Labor. And a policy that is a little to the right of a Labor/Green policy probably satisfies Labor, since Labor is a little to the right of the Greens.
Good to see the Lobster with a mobster guy is heading for a shellacking…
Consdering giving Reason my second preference. Their policies don’t seem too bad. They seem basically slightly left of centre with a hint of libertarianism.
FL
Will the Cray Brothers get a look in?
Interesting to see the how to vote sheets that the parties hand out. The further left wing you get. The more words on the page. Get back in control sounds like you have bladder or bowel issues.
latest Prahran Seat betting Sportsbet 1.90 Coaltion, Labour 2.60 4.50 Greens; EasyBet make Labour 2.00 Libs 3.00 Greens 3.00.Lads 2.60 all three !!!
Fun to be had..
I don’t think there’s any way the Liberals will win Prahran, personally.
Every difference between 2018 compared to 2014 when they lost by 0.37% vs Greens (or would have beaten Labor by just 0.03%), works against them:
– Much more toxic Liberal brand
– Much less toxic Labor brand (Rudd/Gillard/Rudd still fresh in 2014)
– Demographic changes in the electorate favour a leftward shift
– No incumbency this time (at either state or seat level)
– Allen may be one of the better Lib candidates, but in 2014 they had a locally popular incumbent
– Andrews’ progressive credentials are proven and popular (he was relatively unknown in 2014)
– Current Liberal leader is even more unpopular than Napthine
– Statewide swing in polling against Liberals compared to 2014
– Liberals have noticably shifted to the right since 2014, with a suite of policies targeting outer suburbia that are in direct opposition to the progressive values of the Prahran demographic
I may be proven wrong, but to buck the statewide trend with a positive swing in Prahran would require overcoming A LOT of factors working against them. If anything I think the swing against the Liberals will be strongest in the inner city electorates, regardless of how appropriate for the electorate their candidate may be (Albert Park a possible exception because demographic changes there favour the Liberals more).
That’s not to say I think Albert Park will turn blue or that there will even be a swing towards them, but the ongoing gentrification of that electorate will likely negate some of the anti-Liberal swing I expect to see in seats like Prahran, Melbourne, Hawthorn & Caulfield.
Ladbrokes now has Labor 1.07, Coalition 6.00 and Greens a bit outside at 101.00
I suspect the coalition’s SSM shenanigans won’t have been very warmly received, and won’t have been forgotten, by Prahran voters in particular, given the sizeable LGBTQ presence in the electorate.
One of many frustrating aspects of this mess of an election is the return of Victorian Labor’s determination to cut off their nose to spite their face and undermine their entire legislative agenda for the next term to spite the Greens. And I say this as someone who voted Labor, because unlike some of the Labor backroom boys, I would actually like Labor to be able to get their legislation through the upper house.
I’m furious with the Greens at this election, and I put them as low down my Legislative Council vote as I could without my preferences going to anyone who’s going to vote for things I fundamentally disagree with. And yet, as someone who was quite invested in a number of pieces of Labor legislation getting up that did not get up in this last term because microparties that Labor installed voted against it, it’s so frustrating to see Labor trying to make their problem even worse in the next term.
Prioritising spiting the Greens over passing Labor legislation is absolutely bloody stupid yet it seems to be a recurring habit of the Victorian branch.
I usually give Reason (SEX party?) my first preference because they do have good policies and are not a total machine like the ALP or LNP (or even Greens for that matter). Second preference then flows on during the count.
booleanbach
I usually give Reason (SEX party?)
I hope you realize at the rate we are populating this Earth it will probably end up with our Extinction!.
Can someone answer a technical ?
In today’s Age newspaper there was a advertisement placed by the Parliament of Victoria for printing works.
I was under the impression that during caretaker conventions tenders for government services should not be placed…. or is The Parliament considered differently?
The process to launch the tender for new stationary would have been approved months ago.
Rebecca
The Greens have just spent three years attacking Labor.
Never a kind word. Not one.
Election time and the Greens sidle up for political hugs and kisses.
You do understand the reaction, don’t you?
Akubra
I’m not sure about the Vic Parliament, but the Federal Parliament is not subject to caretaker- as it is not part of Executive Government and subject to the direction of PM&C.
May well be the same for the Mexicans
Everyone seems super excited! 🙂
So, does anyone know what was the biggest blowout to Labor and when did it happen? Other than, hopefully, tomorrow, of course.
Yes Rebecca – so the ALP should trash its own agenda and get Shooters and Fishers elected plus an “Aussie Battler” who believes immigrants should be deportable if they commit any offence within 10 years, in order to punish those wicked Greens. Isn’t that obvious?
@Cat
That would probably be 2002, Labor won just shy of 58-42 on the 2PP.
Expat @ #179 Friday, November 23rd, 2018 – 6:52 pm
Thanks, Expat. That would have to have been Labor under Steve Bracks. Yes? How could you resist him? 🙂
Yep, that was the Bracks era. The 88 seats fell 62-24(17+7) Labor’s way, with 2 independents.
The thing about the Shooters and Fishers is that they are who they are.
Which is not what one could say about the Greens.
They aren’t who they say they are.
The poor old Greens. They don’t even love each other any more.
Just watched the (pre-election) Drum on ABC.
Must give kudos to Julie Baird her producer and the Drum team for the most sensible ABC current affairs program on air. Beats Q&A, 7:30 and all others hands down. The panel are almost always rational, thoughtful, and knowledgeable; they don’t try to play the person but the policies and topic of discussion.
They are selected far away from the Lathams & Hansons you see on Ch7 or Ch9 or Ch10.
Greensborough Growler: It isn’t about who you want to be mates with, it’s about who’s going to pass your legislation. It should go without saying that installing people who oppose your bills is a bad idea, even if you don’t like some of the people who do. This is politics, not Sweet Valley High.
Labor’s now ensured that all their legislation Purcell and the SFF blocked last time is going to remain impossible for at least another term.
booleanbach
Plus one.
Rebecca
A Greens saying that it is Labor’s fault?
What a surprise.
AM
The Liberals are taking the privatisation of the sewerage system to this election – not that you would know it
As with Labor forming government, they will prosecute the delivery of their programme they take to the election
Ditto for the Liberals
That is politics – it is about numbers and occupying the Treasury benches
The government of the day will negotiate with the Upper House to progress its legislative agenda
With Labor in government what you can Guarantee is that the Liberals will oppose – that is their DNA
And the same goes the other way – but not without reservation, so oppose for the sake of opposing is not as evident
The Greens, if they have any representation in either House, will never be initiators of policy
The best position they will ever be in is a number, a number which can be negated by negotiation with others
To assume the Greens or any representation they may have is more advantageous to any government over and above the position of any other Member is a nonsense
The government is the government
And I will be putting the Greens last because of the threats they make – particularly to any Labor government by viewing they are in Coalition when they are not and never will be
Legends in their own life time (or lunch time)
If I had been resident in Tasmania during the time of Bob Brown I would have preferenced him after Labor
Your response shows that, typically, the Greens do not address reality
They are a fringe party with no greater status than any other non Labor or non Liberal person elected to either House
The Greens spent the past four saying Labor is no different from the Liberals. In fact they’re still saying it, in their election materials.
They do everything they can to win seats from the Labor Party.
But as the election approaches they have the hide to say they’ll be happy to help themselves to a few ministries in a Labor government. Then they get upset when Labor says no.
And now they’re complaining that the Labor Party is defending its seats. What do they expect Labor to do? Meekly submit?
If Ratnam and
Fulvio Sammut on the main thread at 414pm has eased my pre-election stress with this offering concerning Barnaby Joyce’s hand-picked head of his carp taskforce quitting over disagreements regarding the release of carp herpes to cull this introduced fish species.
I shudder to think how Joyce proposes to pass herpes on to innocent carp.
No, but preferencing a bunch of right wing micro parties who will vote against most their agenda above the greens who will vote with most of it is indeed an act of spite.
areaman
When are you Greens going to wake up?
Because Labor has woken up!
You Greens have just spent four years kicking Labor in the ghoolies, doing as much damage to Labor as possible, and now you come crawling for Labor preferences.
And what is the basis of this crawling?
That you Greens are on Labor’s side!
Haha. Good one!
Greens especially Victorian Greens, still bashing the Labor Party.
Maybe they do the work instead, of you know bullying other parties, right?
Greens vote with Libs quite a lot. Their first vote was to make a Liberal speaker , just to flex their muscles. Been very hostile. I placed them quite low on my ballot. Just really sick of them.
Matthew Guys only hope for a respectable result is Greens hurting Labor otherwise this election they would be dead on arrival.
I never said they’re on labor’s side, rather that they have a similar policy agenda. There is a heap more that the ALP would have passed in the last parliament if they had preferenced the Greens in Western Victoria over Vote 1 Local jobs.
The Greens apologists here are really hilarious. They sound like Mathias Cormann still banging on about how it’s all Labor’s fault.
This coming from a very strong (former) Greens voter.
Boerwar: I voted Labor. I want Labor to pass their own legislation that was defeated this term because they preferenced Purcell. And now even more Labor legislation is going to get defeated by conservatives. This is not a good thing.
The Greens losing seats to Labor is good. The Greens losing seats to people who oppose Labor legislation, so even more good bills get voted down, is not good. This is not rocket science.
Progressive voters – if you don’t like some of the attitudes expressed by ALP zealots here, who are willing even to damage their own party’s interests in order to harm the Greens, remember you don’t need to preference the ALP in the Upper House. You only need to fill a minimum of 5 boxes below the line, but it’s generally better to fill as many as you can until you find candidates who are unpalatable. Candidates who are unpalatable may include those representing a party that is so motivated by negativity that it is prepared to damage its own agenda and be instrumental in the election of far right candidates in order to indulge its dysfunction. Or maybe its agenda isn’t so far from its RWNJ proxies anyway? Happy voting everyone!
Do you have any stats to back that up? My understanding was that they vote with the ALP an order of magnitude more in matters of substance. And in cases like public housing they were coming at it from completely the opposite angle from the libs.
But it it pretty unambiguously Labor’s fault that they couldn’t their own Fire Rescue Victoria legislation through the upper house because of who they help get elected.