We now have as much in the way of results out of the federal election as we’re ever going to, with the Australian Electoral Commission finally publishing preference flow by party data. The table below offers a summary and how it compares with the last two election. They confirm that YouGov Galaxy/Newspoll was actually too conservative in giving the Coalition 60% of preferences from One Nation and the United Australia Party, with the actual flow for both parties being nearly identical at just over 65%.
The United Australia Party preference flow to the Coalition was very substantially stronger than the 53.7% recorded by the Palmer United Party in 2013, despite its how-to-vote cards directing preferences to the Coalition on both occasions. A result is also listed for Palmer United in 2016, but it is important to read these numbers in conjunction with the column recording the relevant party’s vote share at the election, which in this case was next to zero (it only contested one lower house seat, and barely registered there). Greens preferences did nothing out of the ordinary, being slightly stronger to Labor than in 2016 and slightly weaker than in 2013.
The combined “others” flow to the Coalition rose from 50.8% to 53.6%, largely reflecting the much smaller footprint of the Nick Xenophon Team/Centre Alliance, whose preferences in 2016 split 60-40 to Labor. This also contributes to the smaller share for “others”, with both figures being closer to where they were in 2013. “Inter-Coalition” refers to where there were both Liberal and Nationals candidates in a seat, some of whose preferences will have flowed to Labor rather than each other. The “share” result in this case records the combined Coalition vote in such seats as a share of the national formal vote.
While we’re here, note the blog’s other two recent posts: Adrian Beaumont’s account of Brecon & Radnorshire by-election, and my own in-depth review of the legal challenges against the election of Josh Frydenberg in Kooyong and Gladys Liu in Chisholm.
lizzie says:
Saturday, August 3, 2019 at 7:10 am
https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2019/august/1566136800/jo-lle-gergis/terrible-truth-climate-change
[Given how disconnected policy is from scientific reality in this country, an urgent and pragmatic national conversation is now essential. Other-wise, living on a destabilised planet is the terrible truth that we will all face.]
However did we come to be ruled by a bunch of backward-thinking, narrow-minded fools? How good is that!
Given the tendency of Australians to elect conservative governments, while-ever dysfunction on the centre-left persists this country will make no contribution to the arrest and avoidance of climate change. We have only ourselves to blame. We are incapable of changing ourselves and therefore will be incapable of changing the political outcomes.
The Left-dysfunction is fed by the Liberals. The Greens sustain themselves with it. We will all simmer in Lib-kin Garden.
Power and the political duopoly
Peter Hartcher – Crown corruption ‘investigation’ shows how power really works in Australia
https://www.crikey.com.au/2019/07/31/crown-corruption-inquiry/
C@tmomma says:
Saturday, August 3, 2019 at 8:05 am
nath @ #7 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 7:58 am
when can I expect that apology C@t? You claimed that I had said some terrible things. I think it’s only fair.
No apology. I just realised that I probably won’t be able to find the offensive comment any more because Mr Bowe deleted it. Hence your confidently standing up on your hind legs demanding an apology. You’re a cunning one, I’ll give you that.
______________________________
I find that the 10am deadline for c@t having passed without production of the alleged offending posts, that c@t’s allegations against nath are of a vexatious and malicious nature and so declare.
Lars
Go back to the formguide.
lizzie
Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 9:18 am
Comment #35
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-02/widow-slams-native-vegetation-clearing-amnesty/11377676
Being able to read and, to some extent, comprehend; I think that Ms. Berejiklan could have phrased her comment a little better unless she really wanted to describe herself as one of those without empathy.
As for
Just an opinion – this last is code for buy shares in Caterpillar Bulldozers.
What’s for lunch? Wombat stew with side order of Platypus with native grass salad.
The Integrity Commission needs to be toughened up considerably. It’s not an investigative body, does not collect evidence and cannot initiate legal proceedings. It does not have the powers needed to inquire into anything much at all, let alone the corruption of the Commonwealth bureaucracy.
It is never going to be a good idea for politicians to investigate each other.
Perhaps an office similar to the Auditor General could be given more powers to independently investigate and report on allegations of corruption and the power to refer evidence to prosecuting agencies.
The system is defective.
But nothing will be done in the one-party State in which we live.
Being a criminal is no problem for Dutton if you’re going to Crown Casino!
Spiv visa on demand! https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-03/crown-casino-corruption-silence-major-parties/11379226
Goll @ #47 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 9:56 am
If I read this often enough will it come true?
That Mundo is the point!
zoomster @ #8 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 7:59 am
You’d think “Your grandkids are gonna die unless you do something” would probably be sufficient, wouldn’t you?
But apparently not 🙁
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/building-certifiers-leave-a-trail-of-chaos-20190802-p52ddn.html
As I reported long ago on this forum, when the self-regulation fad was just getting started I was in the building industry and the old hands, who had seen it all before, warned strongly against it. They predicted what would happen to building standards (and, not entirely coincidentally, to safety standards on building sites), and they were completely right.
We had a very good quality control & safety system (government inspectors), one of the best in the world, that had stood us in excellent stead for decades, and we just threw it away. The spivs & shonks won, and now the bill for it all is starting to come due. These high-rise building fiascos are just the tip of the iceberg.
Both major parties are to blame. The cons because it is just their nature to do this shit, and Labor for being dumb enough to fall for it, and/or too gutless to stand against it. But no doubt it will all be Labor’s Fault™.
My advice to the average home buyer is to look for housing that was built no later than about the mid-1990s, before the rot became entrenched and widespread.
If carried on like this when I was a kid, my father would give me a swift kick up the L’arse
BSA Bob says:
Saturday, August 3, 2019 at 8:40 am
Mutual Assured Destruction mentioned back there.
From a personal & Australian point of view, I never worried much during the MAD years. I figured (correctly as it seems) that despite the feinting, arms testing, minor conflicts & general nastiness engineered by both sides that ultimately rational people* would not go all the way.
I’m not so confident anymore. Rational people at that level are hard to find.
* I figured Reagan’s minders would keep him in check.
Last time around there was a human involved who said this is bullshit. Next time around will there be, or will it be a machine that can’t comprehend the consequences.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov
JM
You only have to go to the new estates and see the homes barely a year after construction to see how poorly they stand up to wear and tear. It is a disgrace.
C@tmomma
Just ignore them, bullies don’t like it, an they can’t beat you up.
Pegasus
It was instructive. The Greens carried on with the usual and it amounted to nothing. Complete and utter impotent waste of space.
I lieu of joining the playground brawl of whose fault is Scummo anyway, can I commend to Bludgers the latest podcast on Big Ideas – Certainty vs insecurity: why Scott Morrison defeated Bill Morrison by Erik Jensen, who is the editor of the Saturday Paper and the author of the latest Quarterly Essay (The Prosperity Gospel). It’s not up on the Big Ideas website yet (will post a link when it is), but is available through the ABC listen app. 50 odd minutes of quite productive thoughtfulness.
rhwombat
Thanks.
Player One says:
Saturday, August 3, 2019 at 11:11 am
When has that approach ever worked in the past?
Just in case anyone has not read this yet …
https://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2019/august/1566136800/jo-lle-gergis/terrible-truth-climate-change
…
When the next IPCC report comes out, and the reality starts to hit home about how much we have been lied to, things could get ugly. Six degrees warming is approaching catastrophic global extinction levels.
Unfortunately, by then it will also be too late to do much about it 🙁
I wish C@t, nath and Lars would conduct their (no doubt interesting to them, but moronic and boring to everyone else) threesome in private.
Swap email addresses and go at it all youse like. But arguments – stretching over hundreds of comments, and day after tedious day of slagging-off, threats, insults, mind-numbing triviality and selfish indulgence concerning irrelevant interpersonal mindfucks that no-one gives a shit about – concerning who made what post last year (that’s been deleted anyway) have not the slightest scintilla of appeal.
It’s not that other people actually read through the blow-by-blow postings (I know I certainly don’t, and can’t think why anyone else would want to either). It’s the utter, moronic stupidity of the argument, and complete lack of concern that this is a public forum for relatively serious conversation and reading, not a personal marker pen scribbling area on the back of a cubicle door in a public toilet.
Lars and nath have come here to troll and cause trouble. Nothing else.
C@tmomma is their willing dupe, falling for every snark, heckle and thinly disguised incitement. She buys into and amplifies EVERY SINGLE argument here, whether it concerns her, or her precious Labor party, or not.
Between the three of them they ruin it for everyone else.
I’m fucked if I know why the management permits it to go on and on and on, day after day, week by week, always the same fucking mind-numbing shit show.
link to rhwombat suggested listening?
https://player.fm/series/big-ideas-full-program-podcast/certainty-vs-insecurity-why-scott-morrison-defeated-bill-shorten
“I don’t necessarily agree Biden is the best candidate to beat Trump next year, but I think this is unfair. ”
Sorry fess but as William Munny (Clint Eastwood) said to Billy the House (Gene Hackman) just before he shot him dead in the Unforgiven “fair ain’t got nothing to with it”.
The issue for uncle Joe is whether the criticism is valid. It is. He was wooden in 1988 and 2008 and he hasn’t improved with age. He offers nothing but ‘brand recognition’. That his numbers have solidified merely illustrates how pedestrian the other democrat candidates are.
The great task for the Democrat ticket is to energise both Obama and Hillary voters to come out to the ballot box in about 6 states that matter. Mainly in the urban areas of the rust belt. That’s it.
I seriously doubt that any of the 21 candidates can do that and Trump will likely win again.
Don’t worry P1. Deforestation and other land management practices will fuck the planet before global heating turns up to administer the last rights.
The GBR is dying because of nitrogen runoff into the lagoon every time there is a category 3 storm in the region. It will be dead in 10 years, whereas the coral reefs in the pacific will linger for another couple of decades become climate claims them.
Blessed day.
(May as well repost this from the end of the previous thread…)
Right, so: somebody holds a gun to your beloved pet’s head and says “Give me a prediction right now for every upcoming election in Australia, or Tiddles gets it!” Here are mine…
NT: Despite its gargantuan majority, Labor seems to be doing whatever it can to seal its fate as a one-term government. Let’s call it a hung Parliament, with most crossbenchers supporting the CLP.
ACT: Labor to hold on again, but the Labor/Green majority to be pared back to one seat.
Tasmania: Despite my personal liking of Rebecca White, I acknowledge her probable status as a political cadaver. Labor to lose again under her, or form a minority government under a new leader.
SA: Slightly increased Liberal majority, barring any outbreak of “Brown vs Olsen”-style turmoil.
WA: Labor really have nowhere to go but down – retain with a (possibly greatly) reduced majority.
Queensland: Fittingly enough, Labor’s reinstatement of compulsory preferential voting to see them defeated via One Nation preferences.
Victoria: Same as WA, pretty much.
NSW: Ready to snatch the “jewel in the Liberal crown” title from WA. Another comfortable Lib win, with the Sussex St mob’s reputation remaining as tarnished as ever.
The big one: Labor may be hopeful based on analyses likening 2019 to 1993 and 2004, but so far, unlike in 1996 or 2007, the opposition doesn’t seem to have learned any of the right lessons from their defeat. Moreover, as sickened as I am by the prospect, I see in Morrison the potential to become the most personally popular figurehead since Hawke. For the time being, I’m predicting an increased Coalition majority.
Bushfire
What also gives me the pip is that every now and then someone defends them.
https://thenewdaily.com.au/money/consumer/2019/08/02/myer-david-jones-relevant/
It is horrifying that the 1 degree of global warming that has already happened has been accompanied by the Great Barrier Reef becoming half dead.
@itsthevibe
ROFL.
It’s like written to murdoch’s wet dream.
Andrew Earlwood
The current crop of democratic nominees and the debates so far, dont engender any confidence at all.
Having said that. Trump is persona non gratis even within his own party. Many are not contesting next election
Fox news has gone quite cold on him.
Trumps demeanour is getting worse by the day. Ignore the wind and fury, He is cactus and he knows it.
“It is horrifying that the 1 degree of global warming that has already happened has been accompanied by the Great Barrier Reef becoming half dead.”
It’s nitrogen run off into the lagoon wat dun it Gov’nor!
The increase in category 3 or above storms over the past decade is arguably attributable to climate change and this might therefore have contributed to the bleaching events that invariably follow. But that’s a bit like blaming the local drunk parish priest who turns up at a bus crash scene to administer the last rights for getting in the way of paramedics who are still trying to save some of the victims. He didn’t cause the crash in the first place. Global heating may have a role in administering the last rights to the reef, but that’s about it.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-02/whistleblowers-criticise-parentsnext/11363874?pfmredir=sm
I agree and disagree. Yes, get Democrat voters out to vote, but they also need to nominate a candidate who appeals to educated white voters, particularly independents and Never Trump Republicans.
In the midterms many Trump voters stayed home, but with Trump’s name on the ballot next year they’ll be out in force.
And we have Morrison, with his aggressive “Whose side are you on?” He should be governing for all the country, not just his “side”.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/03/australias-climate-stance-is-inflicting-criminal-damage-on-humanity?CMP=share_btn_tw
Sneaking up on your rival.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1157217173821169664
Full ep of Real Time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EInxgDlQngI
Global warming – I wonder when we’ll get the complaints about how scientists didn’t do enough to warn us?
2030? 2025?
Blobbit
I’ve had furious arguments in the past with scientists on this – they regard their job to do the research and report their findings, and then it’s up to politicians to act.
When I suggested that, in the case of climate change, there was both a need and an obligation to educate the public, I was basically told it was beneath them.
This left the task of explaining climate change to a handful of scientists, often from outside the field, and often the kind sneered at by the profession as ‘populists’.
LOL a MAGA Trumpist crashed the Real Time audience and started heckling.
There is one error that Bernie Sanders keeps making in his statements about Medicare For All. He is saying that middle class taxes will have to go up.
This false claim is mortifying to macroeconomics cognoscenti.
In this context the only reason for raising taxes is if it would be inflationary not to. The purpose of the tax increases would be to delete some of the private sector’s spending power and thereby keep inflation low and stable.
But an interesting facet of Medicare For All is that it would actually be deflationary. By itself, it will cause total spending in the economy to fall, leading to lower prices.
How can this be?
Medicare For All would put out of work a very large number of people employed by the private health insurance industry.
Mass job losses lead to less overall spending and lower prices.
So far from needing to increase taxes, the federal government will need to increase government spending to ensure new jobs for the workers displaced from the private health insurance industry.
The extra government spending would stabilise total levels of spending and employment and avoid the suffering that would be caused by deflation.
“I’ve had furious arguments in the past with scientists on this…”
So, looks like I was wrong. 2019 is when we blame the scientists for not doing enough.
Honestly, maybe some individuals could do more, but attributing the lack of action on global warming to the community of scientists is laughable. If there is any contribution there, it’s be down to the 100th least important one.
Anyway, back to numbers. Was the mis-assignment of preference flows enough to explain the polling error?
Vic
The Presidential election will, I’m afraid, eventually come down to two old white men – the plagiarist versus the racist.
I think a Warren/ Mayor Pete ticket would be the best bet, and win easily. I’m not sure about Biden. In that contest, Trump has a chance.
zoomster, re blaming scientists. I have a different take. Science is hard. So is politics. You need to be driven and focused to succeed. It is virtually impossible to be good at both and I suspect it takes a very different set of skills. But it’s politics that governs us. Politicians decide how important science is to us. We need to blame the politicians (and ourselves) for not caring.
I suspect further that only in existential situations (war, epidemic) do our societies value science highly. When that time comes with global warming we must remember who tried to warn us and who did the opposite.
Blobbit
In the early days, when the policy conversations started, this was a real impediment to progress.
Scientists were reluctant to come up with solutions to the problem – their stance was that they had identified the issue, and it was outside their field of expertise to come up with a solution, that was the job of politicians.
Politicians, of course, aren’t experts in the field. So they were being left high and dry when it came to working out solutions. Plus, not being scientists, they weren’t really equipped to explain the issues to others.
Hence Barnaby Joyce et al were able to go around with ‘scientists’ (who were often genuinely so, just not in the field) whose arguments were allowed to go unrefuted – because the people who understood the issue felt it wasn’t their role to mount counter arguments.
It was and is a real impediment to action. Politicians put up what they think would work, but they lack the knowledge to explain why it’s necessary and how the solution helps (outside of soundbites). The electorate haven’t been convinced that they should be worried (this is just weather, part of the natural cycle, we can’t do anything about it anyway).
It’s far easier to sell a program if people are convinced they need it. If they’re unsure, the old Keating maxim kicks in – if you don’t understand it, don’t vote for it.
And if people aren’t prepared to vote for it, action doesn’t happen.
…oh, and it’s quite evident from my original comment that I have been attributing (some) blame to scientists for the last twenty or so years.
Victoria @ #64 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 10:48 am
Allowing systemically substandard critical physical infrastructure is as reckless and irresponsible as it gets for government. One of the cardinal sins. The long-term direct and indirect costs just sky rocket. (See also telecommunications.)
Just another reminder of why we have to get the money out of politics. Money and good governance just don’t mix.
Sadly, I seriously doubt that will happen any time soon.
–––––––––––––
Victoria @ #80 Saturday, August 3rd, 2019 – 12:11 pm
The big question now is moving from how to get rid of him, to how to stop him wreaking huge damage in vindictive vengeance on his way out and heading straight for bankruptcy & life in jail.
–––––––––––––
Last week I caught up with a long-term Green voter in my broader social circle, who (unprompted) now agreed that the Gs are political numpties who have refused to grow up and face the political reality that if Labor are not in government then the Gs get nothing too, and are basically achieving fuck-all.
It’s a start. There must be others too.
The solution to the problem is reducing emissions. Blindingly obvious and universally recognised.
It is not the job of climate scientists to say how this should be done. This falls on politicians (and us).
Well this is a surprise!
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/aug/03/abc-board-secret-shortlist-of-candidates-ignored-in-favour-of-mining-executive-revealed