Nothing succeeds like secession

A new poll finds a certain amount of support for Western Australia to go it alone, as the Federal Court finds facts in Clive Palmer’s constitutional challenge against the state’s border closures.

The West Australian has a poll today from Painted Dog Research showing 34% out of 837 respondents from the state favour secession for Western Australia. However, the utility of this finding is limited by the report’s failure to offer any insight as to how many of the other 66% were actively opposed and how many uncommitted, if indeed the latter was provided as an option. The poll also finds “close to three-quarters” think the federal government has put the needs of the eastern states ahead of Western Australia during the pandemic. I wouldn’t normally consider such a poll front page news, but it’s past time for a new general discussion thread, so here it is.

There is also the following:

• Since Tuesday’s post from Adrian Beaumont on the extraordinary finding of a Reid Research poll of voting intention in New Zealand, the other regular pollster in the country, Colmar Brunton, has produced a somewhat more modest result: Labour 53%, National 32%, Greens 5%, ACT New Zealand 4.8% and New Zealand First 2%. It also finds Jacinda Ardern with a 54-20 lead over the new National leader, Judith Collins, as preferred prime minister. There’s an interesting discussion on polling in the country, the record of which is apparently very good, on Radio New Zealand’s The Detail program.

• As noted in my popular dedicated post on the subject, elections will be held today for two seats in Tasmania’s Legislative Council. One of these at least, for the Launceston region seat of Rosevears, includes both Liberal and Labor candidates, and might be seen as some sort of barometer for the state’s new-ish Premier, Peter Gutwein, who has been recording exceptionally strong poll ratings amid the COVID-19 crisis. Live coverage of the count will, as ever, commence here at 6pm.

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.

1,962 comments on “Nothing succeeds like secession”

  1. And before I do finally turn in, I think C@tMomma is being bullied because of her gender.

    She is a very genuine poster, who contributed valuable information to this blog.

    C@t has not said anything more controversial than any number of other posters here, but she is being “re-educated” by a few on the blog.

    I find their posts to C@t demeaning and derogatory, and wonder why they feel the need to “re-educate” a woman on this blog, when there are many men who post similar sentiments to C@t, but who are not treated similarly.

    Remember guys, you are complaining about how Pegasus was treated differently to male posters, and I will not disagree, but you are ignoring what is happening to C@t, which contain the same level of abuse.

    Once again – think before you make these ad hominem posts – you are probably convinced you are not selectively targeting females, but William’s data about women being chased off / choosing to leave this blog are telling a story.

  2. On the theme: A small thing, but one I’ve noticed, past and present. Gladys and Julia (Berejiklian and Gillard) get referred to by their first names in a way that pretty much never happens with male politicians. I don’t think I’ve ever seen the PM referred to simply as “Scott”. I’ll leave it to others to make a big feminist rant about it (zedtime for me too), I just think it’s a weird look.

  3. I’ve noticed that too, Bird of paradox. It also often applies to ‘celebrities’ from other fields, where women are often referred to by their first name, and men are referred to by their surnames. There are exceptions though, usually when the man’s surname is too common/non-specific, such as Boris Johnson, who gets referred to as ‘Boris’ rather than ‘Johnson’.

  4. alfred venison @ #1938 Tuesday, August 4th, 2020 – 11:31 pm

    Player One – I have re-read this several times now, and the meaning remains elusive. I am not sure why a misogynistic insult should be considered more insulting to a woman who is a labor supporter than to a woman who is a green supporter.

    i find that remark somewhat ambiguous, too, but i read its criticism as directed at the board, not greens supporters or Pegasus.

    to me, Bowe, W. is contending that, (1) were a labor woman to be treated like Pegasus was treated, the board would have erupted in such an uproar that he, Bowe, W., would have been well nigh driven by the force of continuous din to ban the perp in order to restore peace.

    that didn’t happen in the case of Pegasus, and therefore, i think, he, Bowe, W., contends (2) the board is in the wrong, and somewhat hypocritical in its commitment to making & keeping the board a safe place for women of all party persuasions. -regards, a.v.

    And this is where the Defenders of Pegasus are WRONG.

    I know for a fact, that Pegasus’ vindictive focus on lizzie, as sweet and as innocent a person as we have here, nearly drove lizzie from the blog. And I’m sorry lizzie for having to bring that up but alfred venison’s sanctimonious panglossian overview just had to be answered with FACTS.

    Pegasus is not the innocent blog saint that the Defenders of Pegasus are trying to make her out to be. She was/is as divisive a character as I am. No more, and certainly no less. She was eminently capable of woman on woman misogyny if you didn’t agree with her. I was just strong enough of character to call her out. Not everyone is.

    And I’d really appreciate it if Douglas and Milko would quit referring to Pegasus’ contributions as original. They weren’t. What they were was boilerplate Greens agit prop. Fine, if you want to see more of that, say so, but original thought it wasn’t.

    Now, personally, I don’t mind if Pegasus wants to ride back into the blog like a triumphant valkyrie flanked by the Defenders of Pegasus. However, if she or they thinks that now makes her a protected species immune from criticism but allowed to dish it out unfettered, well, that’s up to the blog moderator to decide. It’d be pretty suss though.

  5. “Thank you, AV — I could not (indeed, did not) have said it better myself. I’d also like to put in a good word for Historyintime, who described my general attitude to moderation very well. I suspect he may have some practical experience in the field.”

    ***

    It’s a fine line. Speaking generally, over-moderation, undue censorship, or letting your personal views influence decisions as a moderator is a big no no. On the other hand, letting the inmates run the asylum is also a big no no.

    William, it isn’t easy to admit you could have handled something better and for that I give you credit. Personally, I feel in hindsight I should have done more to defend a fellow Green from the vile attacks that she was copping on here on a daily basis. Peg did such a great job of swatting the trolls away though and considering that I reckon she is just taking a break and will be back to hold the Laborites accountable again before too long. I hope so. Posters like her make this place worth coming to.

  6. Barney

    Unlike you Gillard is under no illusions about the climate deniers in the LNP.

    The only way they are going to change is when they are defeated in the party room or the ballot box.

    You cannot get the LNP on board as long as the deniers are in charge. You can surrender political capital talking to the deniers all you want. They will vote themselves out of office before they accept a carbon price.

Leave a Reply

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