First up, note the new-ish posts below on a YouGov poll for South Australia and Adrian Beaumont’s latest on the US race.
• A federal by-election looms for the seat of the Queensland Groom, centred on Toowoomba. This follows yesterday’s announcement by Liberal-aligned LNP member John McVeigh, the member since 2016 and previously state member for Toowoomba South from 2012,. that he will retire due to his wife’s illness. With Labor having polled 18.7% of the primary vote in the seat at the 2019 election, it seems a fairly safe bet that they will be sitting this one out. To the extent that the seat has been interesting it has been as a battleground between the Liberals and the Nationals, most recently when McVeigh’s predecessor, Ian Macfarlane, had his bid to defect from the former to the latter blocked by the Liberal National Party administration in 2015. John McVeigh’s father, Tom McVeigh, held the seat for the National/Country Party from 1972 to 1988 (it was known until 1984 as Darling Downs), but it passed to the Liberal control at the by-election following his retirement.
• Roy Morgan has an SMS poll of state voting intention in Victoria, and while the methodology may be dubious, it delivers a rebuke to the news media orthodoxy in crediting Daniel Andrews’ Labor government with a two-party lead of 51.5-48.5. The primary votes are Labor 37%, Coalition 38.5% and Greens 12.5%. The results at the 2018 election were Labor 42.9%, Coalition 35.2% and Greens 10.7%, with Labor winning the two-party vote 57.3-42.7. The poll was conducted Tuesday to Thursday from a sample of 1147.
• An international poll by the Pew Research Centre finds 94% of Australians believe their country has handled the pandemic well and 6% badly, whereas 85% think the United States has handled it badly and 14% well, while the respective numbers for China are 25% and 73%. Twenty-three per cent have confidence in Donald Trump to do the right think for world affairs, down from 35% last year, equaling a previous low recorded for George W. Bush in 2008. Only 33% of Australians have a favourable view of the United States, down from 50% last year, a change similar to that for all other nations surveyed.
Beemer
I already answered that
NSW Update for the week
41 New cases for the week commencing 13 September
25 of those cases (61%) are Overseas returnees in hotel quarantine
https://covidlive.com.au/nsw
Guytaur
The difference is we see progressives openly saying they wont turn out for Biden because he isn’t their sort of progressive the right wont have that problem.
Beemer
See the polls. Plus. This will enthuse voters to vote for Democrats.
The Obama pitch at the DNC.
Edit:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crowds-gather-at-supreme-court-to-remember-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg/2020/09/18/895ee13c-fa18-11ea-be57-d00bb9bc632d_story.html
Guytaur
The polling was all before Ginsburg passed away and there are moments in nearly all election campaigns where one party gains an opening and this could turn out to be the republicans moment.
Beemer
You don’t get it. The enthusiasm goes both ways. You will see more not less young people and other progressives vote for Biden.
None of which matters if the Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favour in a disputed election
Guytaur
Yep just like the surge in enrollments for the SSM survey was going to help progressives. Up to this point there has been little for Trump to hang his hat on but now he and other conservatives have their political dream and they will attack hard on it.
Relying on young people is not a good political strategy.
Beemer
You still don’t get it.
Seniors are voting for Biden.
The Pandemic and Social Security.
As I told you. Biden already has that.
This won’t change that. Evangelical’s were always enthusiastic
At least listen to the 538 podcasts if you don’t pay attention to anything else. People with every incentive to be accurate.
Guytuar
Biden has nothing until people actually vote.
Beemer
Trump has nothing until people actually vote.
Except all the points I have just made about unfair elections.
This ends my engagement with you on this for now
Beemer
Struggling to see your logic on this one. A spot on the Supreme Court was always going to be decided by this election, the sad passing of Ruth Ginsburg hasn’t changed that. Ruth Ginsburg was almost certainly never staying on the court beyond the election, let alone for another four years. Everyone knew she was very ill. Trump was already making the court an issue in his campaign for that very reason, and anyone with any interest in the balance of the court already knew that. Were the Democrats to wave through a Trump nominee, particularly if they are particularly polarising or controversial, I believe the down side would be huge. Likely party disunity and people staying home would be the likely outcomes.
Guytaur
Exactly Trump has nothing either.
Your problem is your analysis isn’t broad enough and falls back on “young people” or “individual polls” when election after election shows the electorate is more complex and there is still over 40 days until election day with Trump now having something to campaign on.
Beemer see my last reply in full not cherry picked.
End of discussion for me.
————————————————————-
Latest update
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
Matt31
The SC is always an issue but as long as Ruth Ginsburg was alive then the election was entirely on the economy and the virus and if this spot remains open through the election campaign then that gives Trump something to campaign on but you are also right that if the Democrats allow the next nominee through before election could see some stay home.
Ginsburg held on too long – should have retired in 2010 – when she was 77. One way or the other the Republicans get to 6-3 now. Although like Senate control in Australia they may regret that win.
If I had a dollar for every time somebody has made that proclamation on here this year…
Today’s full ep of Real Time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqMn3k2J1Lo&ab_channel=silverlycangirl
Rational Leftist
I don’t think anyone here thinks Trump will win.
Mexicanbeemer @ #168 Saturday, September 19th, 2020 – 2:21 pm
Nobody thought the Coalition would win here either. Not even the Coalition.
Player One
I know and that is why i’m hesitant to dismiss the significant of the SC to the conservative base which has had no other reason to support Trump.
Here’s a view from a former Trump advisor.
A.J. Delgado
@AJDelgado13
· 3h
I disagree. This is awful for Trump’s election.
People motivated, even in part, by wanting a conserv SC were already voting for him. So…. no gain.
But this will, however, energize the Indies and Libs who don’t want to a hardcore social conserv on the Court. twitter.com/katyturnbc/sta…
Matt31 @ #161 Saturday, September 19th, 2020 – 2:03 pm
Like Labor here, the Democrats in the US need to learn that their opponents no longer play by the rules. Although it is not 100% clear that they ever did, they certainly do so no longer.
Not playing by the rules is how people like Trump and Morrison succeed, when logic tells you they should fail, and fail badly.
How many harsh lessons is it going to take for them to learn this? Likely a few more, because it is not them, it is us poor saps that suffer the consequences of their inability to learnt this basic lesson. Win or lose, they continue to collect their enormous parliamentary salaries at the end of each week, polish up their resumes, or schmooze with their political and industry contacts who will smooth the transition into their post-parliamentary careers – all while we struggle to get by on minimum wages or less, or depend on pathetic pensions or handouts.
I certainly don’t dismiss the significance of the Supreme Court for Conservatives. But as I said in my previous post, I don’t think anyone would have believed for a second that Ginsburg’s spot wasn’t going to be open, whether she had passed today or not. Only a few weeks ago there was a big scare and suggestions she may be close to death. So she sure wasn’t going to be able to stay another full Presidential term. So I really don’t think a lot has changed in that sense; if the Supreme Court was a major motivation for a voter, they were always going to vote and vote Trump, even if holding their nose while doing so, knowing that the spot would be open. So I do think this is a fight the Democrats absolutely need to have.
GG
That’s exactly how I see this; think the former Trump advisor nails it.
It also should be remembered that RBG was a liberal celebrity. This isn’t just some random liberal Justice. This is the lioness. The grief of her loss, combined with an 11th hour attempt to replace her with some hard right justice is going to be quite motivating for Democrats and their potential supporters.
Although I do wonder: how is this going to affect the “Never Trump” Republicans (especially if the nomination miraculously gets held off until January 20)? Are they still going to be solidly behind the “return to decency and normalcy” candidate? Or will the pragmatism of having an extra conservative judge on the court (an effect that will outlast a Trump presidency) bring them back into the GOP fold, in a holding-their-nose “The worst Republican is better than the best Democrat” kind of way?
You can hear Tim Miller’s reaction to RBG’s death at around the 37min mark of the Real Time video I posted. He says this is the worst possible thing for the election and things are going to get way more ugly.
I suspect most other never Trumpers would agree with him.
Rational Leftist @ #175 Saturday, September 19th, 2020 – 3:12 pm
Not trying to rain on your parade, but remember when Bob Hawk died just before the last election here?
All I am saying is that the Democrats should be careful before they try to politicize this event – it could easily backfire.
‘Big mistake’: Trump’s favorite pollster tells Fox News why Republicans shouldn’t push nomination before the election
Fox News on Friday examined why it would be a “big mistake” for Republicans to attempt to force through a nominee to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court.
Following Ginsburg’s death, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) vowed that Trump’s nominee would receive a vote, but did not specify whether it would occur before the election or during the “lame duck” session of Congress that occurs before the 2020 election victors are sworn in.
But conservative pollster Scott Rasmussen warned Republicans it would be a bad idea during an appearance with Fox News personality Laura Ingraham.
“I think the president should come out and say, ‘I want the American people to decide this, I’m going to nominate someone after I’m re-elected, here’s who I’m thinking of nominating and by the way, I want to specifically hear from Joe Biden who he’s going to nominate.’ And the reason I think he should do that is that’s puts the focus on the choice for the court, not on this side argument of whether or not the confirmation battle should go ahead right now,” he explained.
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/09/big-mistake-trumps-favorite-pollster-tells-fox-news-why-republicans-shouldnt-push-nomination-before-the-election/
NSW and ACT not intervening in Palmer’s High Court challenge to the legality of the Western Australia border controls.
Every other state and territory involved which means Palmer will be up against everyone given that the Commonwealth has pulled out as well.
By volume, Australia and Indonesia will export roughly the same quantity of coal this year, around 430 million tonnes. Around 50% of Australian exports are of metallurgical coal. Indonesia exports about twice as much thermal coal as Australia. Because of the composition of the supplies, Australian coal has a significantly higher value than Indonesian coal.
Indonesian exports have fallen significantly this year (by volume) while Australian exports were little changed in the first few months but are expected to decline year-on-year.
Comparing an Australian election where an unpopular opposition leader began by narrowly leading a mildly popular incumbent to this election is probably the first error here. Secondly, the death of somebody who has been out of power for decades is not the same as a death that will heavily shift the ideological balance of things to come. Thirdly, I am just pointing out considerations. I am not having a “parade” – I definitely agree that it’s a two-sided coin (as the second paragraph of that post you replied to makes clear.) Biden’s campaign should definitely cover it, but they definitely shouldn’t centralise the message – the current message of absolute failure of Trump’s leadership is working as is.
P1 is once again celebrating their misfortunes by bagging Labor. They seem to delight in their regrets.
Also, the make-up of the court isn’t really a motivator for a lot of swinging suburban voters who are more interested in the hip-pocket and not being allowed to leave the house without a mask issues.
Not trying to rain on your parade, but remember when Bob Hawk died just before the last election here?
All I am saying is that the Democrats should be careful before they try to politicize this event – it could easily backfire.
_____________________________________
The only difference is that Hawke’s death made no difference to the body politic going forward. On the other hand, the opportunity to appoint a new Supreme Court judge on the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg will have fundamental implications for the rights of women, in particular, and minorities, as well as the social glue that keeps the USA together.
Maybe not Biden, but many Superpacs should be out there scaring the hell out of anyone who thinks that it doesn’t matter who is the next President, when they have the power to fundamentally change the laws under which the USA coheres.
Rational Leftist @ #181 Saturday, September 19th, 2020 – 3:34 pm
I think you are reading too much into my post, since it seems we basically agree. I’ll try to be a little clearer: Politicizing this event by either the Democrats or the Republicans is fraught with the possibility of it backfiring. If either side is seen to be trying to profit from it politically, they will probably end up the loser.
Play a straight bat and just get on with the game.
Non @ #182 Saturday, September 19th, 2020 – 3:37 pm
I am trying to help Labor, dingbat!
Just got a DL sized leaflet in my letterbox from the Greens political party.
Doesn’t.mention.the.environment. At.all
Have they ceded the environmental vote to Labor? Are even the Greens unwilling to campaign on environmental issues?
Incidentally, they are apparently planning to fund their health and education polices with, wait for it, A 55 BILLION increase in mining royalties – can’t do that if you stop exporting all that coal.
I actually think it would be really good if Labor and the Greens could get together in a proper cooperative alliance – but not much chance if they demonstrate this total lack of principles.
I some of the swing against the ALP in 2019 was voters who lost their jobs or whose parents lost their jobs in industries where tariffs were phased out under Hawke and/or Keating being reminded of the tariff cuts and job losses by Hawke`s death. (Not helped by Keating`s post campaign launch interview).
Ginsberg is not associated with painful economic changes, so is unlikely to have a similar effect.
ajm
That seems incredibly illogical.
trump is trying anything to win election – now trying to pledge his way out of his own arse.
Loyalty in the Murdoch camp seems to be a one-way affair. Devine must be feeling miffed since being left out in the cold to fight her own battles.
ajm @ #187 Saturday, September 19th, 2020 – 3:51 pm
I agree about Labor needing to work more closely with the Greens. They appear to have no other path back to government. Despite the best efforts of the gibbons, just shifting further to the right seems to me to be doomed to failure. I mean, the Coalition are so much better at that!
But the Greens haven’t really been an environmental party since the days of Bob Browne and Christine Milne. I wish they would change their name, but I guess they know if they did that they would be out of business in a heartbeat 🙁
The Indian parliament met for the first time in six months on September 14 and was to function until October 1, but the two officials said its duration could be reduced by a week.
Rex will be enraged that the greens are using $55 billion in mining royalties to fund their policies, after all only yesterday Labor was ” stupid” for not finding alternate ways of replacing such funds.
citizen @ #191 Saturday, September 19th, 2020 – 4:14 pm
A nomination for BK’s “arsehole of the week” seems in order.
Tom the first and best says:
Saturday, September 19, 2020 at 4:07 pm
I some of the swing against the ALP in 2019 was voters who lost their jobs or whose parents lost their jobs in industries where tariffs were phased out under Hawke and/or Keating being reminded of the tariff cuts and job losses by Hawke`s death. (Not helped by Keating`s post campaign launch interview).
Ginsberg is not associated with painful economic changes, so is unlikely to have a similar effect.
————————————-
TomTF&B
Entirely different in the sense Trump is struggling for momentum and that is important in American politics because getting the base out swings elections but now the open spot on the SC gives wavering conservatives who might be upset with Trump a reason to turn out on polling day. The left would be foolish to not see the danger just as Bowen should not have dared pensioners to vote against the ALP if they didn’t like its franking credit policy.
But- but- PvO thinks that Morrison will win the next election.
Mexicanbeemer,
The Democrats can be inspired to turn out to PREVENT Trump getting the next SCOTUS pick too, you know.
SMH has really gone nutters:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-good-times-with-china-are-over-get-used-to-it-20200917-p55wqs.html