The day of the happy event

The false starts and prevarications are set to end this morning with the official announcement of a May 18 federal election.

It’s now a known known that Scott Morrison will be visiting the Governor-General early this morning to advise an election for May 18. Two things to mark the occasion: first, what I’ll call a provisional update of BludgerTrack, since it doesn’t include some state-level data I’m hoping to get hold of today. Adding the post-budget polling from Newspoll, Ipsos and Essential Research, it records a 0.3% improvement for the Coalition on two-party preferred, reducing the Labor lead to 52.6-47.4 from last week. If you observe the trendlines in the display on the sidebar or the full BludgerTrack results page, this shows up as a continuation in an ongoing improvement for the Coalition from their miserable starting point in the immediate aftermath of Malcolm Turnbull’s removal, rather than a “budget bounce”.

Secondly and more importantly, I offer the Poll Bludger’s federal election guide, even if it’s not what I’d entirely regard as ready yet.

Here you will find the most finely appointed Poll Bludger election guide yet published, with exhaustive and exhausting summaries of all 151 House of Representatives, each of which features bells and whistles both familiar (previous election booth results maps and displays of past election results) and new (data visualisation for a range of demographic indicators that now extends to ethnicity on age distribution). A Senate guide remains to be added, the betting odds are yet to be added to the bottom of the sidebars, and the whole thing is badly in need of proof reading. Rest assured though that all that will be taken care of in the days and weeks to come, together with campaign updates and further candidate details as they become available.

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.

1,010 comments on “The day of the happy event”

  1. Dr. Dena Grayson
    @DrDenaGrayson
    ·
    5m
    BREAKING

    @CNN
    reports that the DOJ will unveil details on the federal charges against Julian Assange within hours.

  2. Firefox @ #952 Thursday, April 11th, 2019 – 10:41 pm

    “Firefox,
    As I think it was explained to you yesterday, focusing on Adani is a boutique concern of The Greens primarily. A party of government, such as Labor is and The Greens will never be, has to take a host of considerations into account and bald statements in black and white, such as The Greens make and want Labor to make, serve no useful purpose.”

    Again, the Greens are currently in government in the ACT and have been part of multiple other governments in the past. I know Labor has a born to rule mentality and is a part of the two party establishment. You don’t need to tell me that.

    I didn’t ask you to give me spin about what Labor may do. I asked you what YOU personally think about Adani. Should it happen or not? Please don’t dodge the question like a politician.

    “Labor will be prudent and considerate of the issues that animate The Greens if they get to form the next government of Australia and The Greens should return the favour.”

    So we should just sell out the environment to make Labor happy, is that what you’re suggesting? Maybe you’d like us to sell out the innocent asylum seekers locked up on remote islands just to make things politically easier for Labor too? Sorry, it doesn’t work like that.

    No one reads late night Greens editoriakls.

    Not even the Greens.

  3. For everybody’s information, GG stated, in a post to this very blog, that the, at the time, proposed Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was, and I quote: ” a populist witch hunt”.

    I have no reason to doubt that this was his sincerely held opinion, but I believe that this fact gives a useful background to the type of mind and world view that gives rise to the views he expresses here.

    He strongly supported Pell, until he didn’t any more. He objected to my using the term Roman Paedophile Protection Society, until it became clearly apparent to the world, and his holiness himself, that that is exactly what they were, from bottom (.) to top. He is strongly partisan in some areas, and extraordinarily hypocritical, without the capacity of recognising it.

    Despite the fact that he has blocked me, he spews random abuse about me, based on the partial and out-of-context impressions he receives of posts that I have made, through their inclusion as quotes in others’ contributions. As they say, LOL.

    It is notable that many people lament that we have entered a Trumpian post-fact world where feelpinions are held to outweigh facts, but these same people are wedded to the sanctity of pre-fact myths, legends and superstitions, as long as they are given the label of ‘established religion’. I think idiotic nonsense is idiotic nonsense, no matter what its source, or its inclusion in a book.

  4. Boerwar @ #640 Thursday, April 11th, 2019 – 5:20 pm

    Steggall is a Liberal. She will nearly always vote with the Liberals.
    So much effort. So little difference.

    The contribution of Steggal et.al to the Labor campaign is that they will force the L/NP to allocate very scarce resources to defend otherwise very safe seats – seats that are unwinnable for Labor.

  5. yabba @ #958 Thursday, April 11th, 2019 – 10:51 pm

    For everybody’s information, GG stated, in a post to this very blog, that the, at the time, proposed Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was, and I quote: ” a populist witch hunt”.

    I have no reason to doubt that this was his sincerely held opinion, but I believe that this fact gives a useful background to the type of mind and world view that gives rise to the views he expresses here.

    He strongly supported Pell, until he didn’t any more. He objected to my using the term Roman Paedophile Protection Society, until it became clearly apparent to the world, and his holiness himself, that that is exactly what they were, from bottom (.) to top. He is strongly partisan in some areas, and extraordinarily hypocritical, without the capacity of recognising it.

    Despite the fact that he has blocked me, he spews random abuse about me, based on the partial and out-of-context impressions he receives of posts that I have made, through their inclusion as quotes in others’ contributions. As they say, LOL.

    It is notable that many people lament that we have entered a Trumpian post-fact world where feelpinions are held to outweigh facts, but these same people are wedded to the sanctity of pre-fact myths, legends and superstitions, as long as they are given the label of ‘established religion’. I think idiotic nonsense is idiotic nonsense, no matter what its source, or its inclusion in a book.

    For the benefit of GG, well said Yabba!

  6. I heard a bit of Steve Price and Angus Taylor on redneck radio while driving tonight. They were trying to criticise Labor policy on EVs. Essentially Taylor is a moron, making all sorts of unsubstantiated comments and clearly without good briefing notes. He would be easily beaten in a debate with his Opposition counterpart.

  7. @CNN
    reports that the DOJ will unveil details on the federal charges against Julian Assange within hours.

    So, in ‘Merica (and presumably anywhere in the world where US toadies are in power) you can be arrested without even knowing what crime you have allegedly done? Charges get “unveiled” later?

  8. So, in ‘Merica (and presumably anywhere in the world where US toadies are in power) you can be arrested without even knowing what crime you have allegedly done? Charges get “unveiled” later?

    Welcome to Trump’s America.

  9. Confessions

    Welcome to Trump’s America.
    ——-

    I suspect these rules pre-date Trump. Assange should have tried to resolve it when Obama was in power. He would probably not have used them.

  10. Democracy Now!

    @democracynow
    Replying to @democracynow
    .@ggreenwald says Julian Assange is not American and Wikileaks is a foreign-based news organization. “So the idea that the U.S. government can just extend its reach to any news outlet anywhere in the world and criminalize publication of documents … is extremely chilling.”

  11. Catholic priests told the children whilst they were raping them that they were going to hell.

    It is used as a threat to cower and intimidate and denigrate.

    Some take it further as an excuse to carry out God’s work.

    Like the ones who threw the gays off the cliffs in Manly. They were going to hell anyway.

  12. For everybody’s information, GG stated, in a post to this very blog, that the, at the time, proposed Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was, and I quote: ” a populist witch hunt”.

    Whic has precisely nothing to do with the subject being discussed. So why post it? The answer is unambiguous — to further derail an already tiresome discussion into a pointless, stupid flame war.

    For the benefit of GG, well said Yabba!

    EGW, this is a stupid comment, and you are a fucking idiot for having posted it.

  13. swamprat @ #966 Thursday, April 11th, 2019 – 9:01 pm

    Confessions

    Welcome to Trump’s America.
    ——-

    I suspect these rules pre-date Trump. Assange should have tried to resolve it when Obama was in power. He would probably not have used them.

    Obama is on record as saying his administration had no interest in pursuing Assange, something that was pointed out here at the time.

    The greatest irony now is that Assange could’ve fronted the UK charges once the Swedish charges were dropped, got a slap on the wrist and hot-footed it back to Australia in time to run for parliament in the 2016 election if he weren’t such a colossal drama queen determined to create a huge public spectacle. I bet right now he’s thinking exactly this.

  14. “No one reads late night Greens editoriakls.

    Not even the Greens.”

    Except you, apparently. Thanks for showing enough interest to quote it and reply. 🙂

  15. Firefox @ #911 Thursday, April 11th, 2019 – 10:06 pm

    Ah ha! Kristyn Glanville is her name. Love seeing a Green taking the far right nutter former PM Abbott head on! Go Kristyn!!

    Well done for trying here Firefox, expectations that the noisiest minors here will be listening or caring for anything but partisan trolling does seem optimistic to me. Such a bunch of wet lettuces, if they think a few sentences on PB will ruin their manifest destiny of governing, they haven’t got much to start with.

    Kristyn does seem to do pretty well in public debates. Even with quite a high profile field and a lot of noise around that seat.

    Back to the topic at hand for many this election

    Any news if more Labor members have signed the pledge for Adani and the future of coal mining that the CFMEU is demanding of them?
    Seems the Labor candidate for Capricornia has signed on.

    Candidates asked to support good, permanent jobs for coal mineworkers
    https://www.medianet.com.au/releases/174417/

    If not what is the Labor plan for a transition to a renewable economy?

  16. The idea that Folau is not a figure whose personal conduct matters, is nuts. He’s a leading member not just of a sport, but PROFESSIONAL sporting clubs where high-dollar sponsorships drive everything. It’s why they earn so much.

    So, yes, that’s the risk you run, when you become a commercial risk. Folau knew that, he’s paying the price.

  17. So Assange is being done for hacking….
    I’d like to see the proof, just establishing without a doubt that he was the one on the other side of those encrypted chat convos is going to be pretty hard.
    I recall hearing that Manning had used the login of a coworker than he happened across. It’s possible he had some advice, probably nothing more than, ‘what what keys he presses’ :/

  18. William Bowe @ #973 Thursday, April 11th, 2019 – 11:05 pm

    For everybody’s information, GG stated, in a post to this very blog, that the, at the time, proposed Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse was, and I quote: ” a populist witch hunt”.

    Whic has precisely nothing to do with the subject being discussed. So why post it? The answer is unambiguous — to further derail an already tiresome discussion into a pointless, stupid flame war.

    For the benefit of GG, well said Yabba!

    EGW, this is a stupid comment, and you are a fucking idiot for having posted it.

    Hi William,

    Do you regard me as a confirmed bigot, as GG says I am, or is he one, for pre-judging the RC?

    At 9.03 pm GG posted:

    “Yabba’s a well known bigot on this blog.

    He just likes to remind everyone of that fact from time to time.”

    This was apparently in response to my observation, re Folau, quoted by EGW:
    “They are terminating his contract because he deliberately flouted one of its key clauses. Nobody gives a flying fuck about his idiotic personal views. (that homosexuals would burn in hell). He was warned last time, don’t condemn people publicly because of who they are. It is against the tenets of a decent society, and specifically directly against the basic principles of the Rugby Union. He agreed with the condition being put in his contract, then less than 4 months after he signed it, he deliberately flouted it. He can piss off, and go and preach his perverted views to any idiots who will listen. Just not as a representative of the Australian Rugby Union, and the rugby community.”

    Flame war? Whose flame war? GG does not even see my posts, as he has boasted on several occasions.
    However he jumps in to call me a bigot. I simply responded, for the benefit of Kate, and other relative newcomers, so that they can understand where GG is coming from. They can then lend his feelpinions the degree of weight that they think appropriate.

  19. “I didn’t read it!”

    How’d you come to the conclusion that it was a “Greens [editorial]” then? Or was that just a completely uninformed comment?

  20. what is doubly ironic and sad about Israel Folau matter (and it is true of marriage debate) is that these christian views are based on a misreading of Paul. Paul was in fact reacting dramatically and morally to excesses and features of the Roman state – things we would no doubt agree with him about. Paedophilia was widespread – legitimised as right of head of family over slave boys, and celebrated in public in temples – as was public homosexual orgies. The corruption of the state, the subjection of women through legitimised affairs by husbands (fornication) – the list went on. Paul is reacting to illegitimate use of power, in seeking to define the basis for a new civility and community. Problem is when literalists take such statements out of context and apply to today, the results can be ludicrous as well as unacceptable. It is sad Folau has to espouse false unscholarly ideas, and pay price such as he had.

    what is also at stake is status of facebook as a publishing medium. some lawyers still regard it as private. were comments on his own page or a collective page? if former what is difference with him discussion ideas at a church or at home or in study?

  21. “Well done for trying here Firefox, expectations that the noisiest minors here will be listening or caring for anything but partisan trolling does seem optimistic to me. Such a bunch of wet lettuces, if they think a few sentences on PB will ruin their manifest destiny of governing, they haven’t got much to start with.

    Kristyn does seem to do pretty well in public debates. Even with quite a high profile field and a lot of noise around that seat.”

    Cheers. Yeah I was really impressed with Kristyn. Such an incredibly hostile room for a Green to face. The pub was full of right wingers who kept trying to interrupt and heckle her as she spoke. On top of that, she was debating a former PM no less. Very tough situation for anyone to be in but she really held her own in there. Would have been a damn boring debate without her too.

  22. “Because you are Greens dickhead who writes dickhead Greens posts.

    What more needs to be said?”

    Maybe dickhead one more time so you can remind us again of how immature you are.

  23. It’s a question of proportionality. GG called people bigot, people called him homophobe. Tiresome, like I said, but nothing I couldn’t hope might wash out after half an hour or so. There was no prospect of that though once you saw fit to unload with a 300 word screed devoted entirely to GG’s deficiencies of character, not a word of which bore any relationship to the contemporary news event that was being discussed.

  24. I’m intrigued by the mutual agreement between most of the press that Tony Abbott’s PM ship never actually existed. Obvious why of course, both the media & Tones himself agitated for it & it was a total fuckup not even they could cover up. So now it never happened. Exhibit A – Simon Birmingham on 7.30 raging against Wayne Swan’s promised surplus. No mention of Tony’s. Sales let it pass.

  25. Nice to see some of the Pell denouncers and he-can-rot-in-hellers now reconsidering their opinions on the infallibility of verdicts.

    Today’s was more than a namby-pamby verdict. Rush, going on the judge’s comments, got aggravated damages because the Tele’s case was so weak the judge thought there was mal-intent and/or reckless indifference in running the story.

    Part of his verdict found that the Tele couldn’t have sincerely believed Eryn Norvill’s story because it had insufficient factual foundation and no serious corroboration. He also found Norvill herself was an unreliable witness in that she exaggerated and embellished her story. He outright factually rejected large slabs of her evidence on behalf of the Tele . He found the Tele’s “truth” defence to be unsustainable, instead finding that the newspaper’s behaviour was of the “worst” kind. Taken together, this is about as close as you can get to “nothing fucking happened”. The judge found the entire yarn was either in Norvill’s imagination, or the Tele made it up based on third hand “information”.

    You couldn’t get a worse finding from a defamation court if you tried.

    And then Norvill immediayely goes out on the steps of the court and publicly repeats the defamatory story, contradicting the judge’s findings. I wonder how many times she needs to be in court for defamation proceedings before she gets the message that her version of events was found to be untrue? Can Norvill herself afford to be sued for defamation? Because if you go around repeating things as true that have – mere minutes before – just been unequivocally adjudicated as being defamatory, with a penalty of millions of dollars in damages, you’re sure asking for trouble.

Leave a Reply

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