With the flood of post-election analysis having subsided and opinion polling yet to properly crank up again (expect that to change when parliament resumes next week), there is not a lot to report. Roy Morgan’s weekly video update last week informed us that Labor leads 53.5-46.5 in its latest round of polling, out from 53-47 the last time it offered a full set of results in the middle of last month, but it didn’t deem fit to offer anything further. The international leadership approval tracking poll by Morning Consult suggests Anthony Albanese’s standing has continued to improve, his approval having cracked 60% and disapproval down to 24%, which compares with 57% and 26% when I last reported on it three weeks ago.
I do have another new entry to relate from the burgeoning field of online psephological tools, courtesy of Alex Jago and Ben Messenger, providing a triangular representation of the increasingly common occurrence of three-cornered contests between Labor, the Coalition and the Greens. This can just as easily be adapted to any combination of three parties or candidates you care to choose, as long as you have a reasonable handle on how preferences are likely to flow between them.
The starting point here is each party’s share of the vote at the second last preference count, to be identified henceforth as 3CP, or three-candidate preferred. The tool’s default preference splits are 80-20 against the Coalition when Labor or the Greens are excluded, roughly consistent with all past experience, and 70-30 in favour of Labor when the Coalition is excluded, which is about what happens when Coalition preferences are so directed. On the last relevant occasion I can think of when they went the other way, when Adam Bandt first sought re-election in Melbourne in 2010, they favoured the Greens 80-20. Happily, the tool allows you to set the splits however you desire.
To explain what’s going on here, I’ll stick with the defaults. The Coalition 3CP is on the x-axis, the Greens are on the y-axis, and the balance belongs to Labor. On the left we see the 3CP needed by the Greens to defeat Labor when the Coalition is uncompetitive, starting at 50% where the Coalition has no votes at all. At this end of the triangle, the dividing line between a Greens win and a Labor win is broken into three parts. As the Coalition’s 3CP increases from nothing to 29%, the Greens’ required 3CP falls gently from 50% to 42% while Labor’s falls sharply from 50% to 30%, reflecting Labor’s higher share of Coalition preferences.
Once the Coalition gets to 30%, they reach the point where they might make the final count in a race where both Labor and the Greens are competitive, without being competitive themselves. Such was the case in Brisbane and Macnamara at the May election, which is why the AEC conducted indicative 3CP counts to provide an early indication of who would ultimately win there out of Labor and the Greens. As this presents the Greens with a new winning scenario where Labor runs third, here their minimum winning 3CP quickly falls from from 42% to 34%. But once the Coalition 3CP is significantly over a third, there is no longer enough left over for both the Greens and Labor to be competitive. Here the 3CP needed by either reduces from 34% to 29% as the Coalition 3CP increases from 34% to 44%.
With the Coalition only receiving 20% of preferences, they need fully 45% on 3CP to be in contention themselves. Even here they only make it if the remainder splits about evenly between Labor and the Greens, since the preferences they receive diminish together with the 3CP of whoever out of Labor and the Greens drops out. From that point on, the Coalition’s chances steadily increase to 100% where their 3CP reaches 50%, at which point they win before Labor or the Greens are excluded.
Boerwar @ #147 Tuesday, July 19th, 2022 – 1:56 pm
I reckon US$120 billion – or US$500 millon per day – would probably be enough to convince him all over again.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/factbox-russias-oil-and-gas-revenue-windfall
BW, I would rather not get into the greens war. I find the Greens posturing pretty meaningless.
Of more interest is the successes and failures of Gillards climate policy suite. The parts that managed to hold on after Abbott won and why the F people voted in Abbott to overthrow other parts of the climate policy. For me, it wasnt the Greens that did that. For me, I am interested in how we get to a public opinion tipping point so Murdoch papers and morning TV presenters cant get away with their BS, so business and farming groups that recognise the importance of climate change start supporting political parties that have policies that match….. so wrecker f’wits like Joyce and Abbott cant get in again.
Player One @ Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 1:53 pm
Careful, your pluralis majestatis is on show again 😉
Pi asked Taylormade why the former shit show (Morrison Government) didn’t release the environmental report when it was due.
You won’t get an answer because to do so he would have to admit to the incompetence, mismanagement, and probable illegality of the former government’s activities.
Like all conservative loons he can only offer up bullshit.
So, who were the environment ministers who spent nine years accelerating the outcomes measured in the latest Fed State of the Environment Report?
Frydenberg
Hunt
Price
Ley
It was not only this suite of inept bunglers, it was also that the environment department was tucked away under the production department, institutionalized out of sight and out of mind. Naturally there were staff cuts. As with all APS staff, environment department staff were required under Morrison not to know anything or to suggest anything. They were there to do what they were told by their ministers.
On the basis of the SOE Report, that must have been very close to fuck all.
Hunt read the room and scarpered. Frydenberg didn’t read the room and was scuppered. Ley survived only as a Morrisonian captain’s pick. Price was the only survivor on merit. She suffered a 9% 2PP swing against her.
Fortunately, Labor made a suite of environmental promises that will give effect to the remedies required by the SOE Report.
Closing submission by the respondents’ counsel:
On Tuesday, the newspapers’ barrister, Nicholas Owens, SC, focused on one of the media outlets’ centrepiece allegations: that Roberts-Smith was involved in the murder of two Afghan prisoners during an SAS mission on Easter Sunday, 2009.
The newspapers allege two Afghan men were pulled from a tunnel on that day in a compound dubbed Whiskey 108 and taken prisoner.
The mastheads called seven witnesses in support of the allegation that men were found inside the tunnel and that Roberts-Smith executed one of them after directing a “rookie” soldier, dubbed Person 4, to kill the other man as a form of “blooding” or initiation.
Roberts-Smith and four of his former comrades maintained no men were found in the tunnel. He told the court that two insurgents were killed lawfully by SAS soldiers outside Whiskey 108, including one by him.
“There’s no doubt about the fact that the men were killed,” Owens said. “The only debate is about the circumstances in which they were killed.”
Owens submitted that if Justice Anthony Besanko accepted the newspapers’ witnesses, who told the court that up to three men were taken from the tunnel, “it follows almost inevitably that your Honour would disbelieve Mr Roberts-Smith’s entire case about Whiskey 108”.’] – Yes.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/sas-soldiers-turned-blind-eye-to-war-crimes-ben-roberts-smith-defamation-trial-told-20220719-p5b2oh.html
Jan 6
IMO if the Greens espouse it, the vast majority of the public go stone deaf to it. The Greens are a 30 year long case study in the abject failure of moral suasion. Why? The vast majority of Australians simply do not trust the Greens. It is not necessarily a policy substance issue. It is a behavioural issue.
It would be illuminating if pollsters asked the following question, just the once.
Do you trust the Greens:
1. A lot
2. A little bit
3. neither trust them nor distrust them
4. Distrust them a little bit
5. Distrust them a lot.
I suspect many Greens would be genuinely shocked at the outcome.
Rex Douglas @ #149 Tuesday, July 19th, 2022 – 1:31 pm
WGAF?
Andrew Gold 2 at 1:58 pm
Ena Sharples and Minnie Caldwell couldn’t compete with that 🙂
Mavis
Thanks for that. What I don’t understand is the degree of doubt or uncertainty that the judge will have to take into account and how the degrees of doubt might influence the decision.
I am not a legal person but the notion that 7 soldiers got together and concocted a story that a Victoria Cross winner murdered a person and caused another person to be murdered because they were jealous is inherently implausible.
Does such an implausibility bear? Or does it go down solely to the credibility of the witnesses’ testimony?
The latest environment report card should embarrass every conservative.
P1: “My intent is to encourage Labor ”
Me: Where is your intent to encourage the LNP, the people you voted for?
P1: “Yours seems to be to encourage Labor to continue to pursue “business as usual””
Me: Yours seems to be to ignore the LNP, the people you voted for, and criticize the ALP for not doing the things that the LNP actively stand against.
P1: “What made you think doubling down on your “inane, nonsensical, boring and frankly rather stupid” comments was a good idea?”
You dropped this:
Iconic and relevant .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AONxdnTrZSU
BW, you blame the greens for that lack of trust. They do some dumb stuff, but they arent trusted solely for that. The bigger picture question is; why you would blame the Greens for the poor state of climate policy in Australia over the last 10 years and not the Country Party? And not just you. There are people who want action on the environment and climate but vote for the Nats. Yes, farming groups etc are changing, but glaciers are melting faster.
When the Greens came out with their tree planting policy – the kick back on the ABC radio was furious. One presenter blasted them. Drilled down into the finer detail far more than he would on the lack of policy from the right side of politics. He got on a person I know from a bush regen group and demanded she explain how silly the policy was – the poor lady pushed back (she isnt a politician but did her best), saying it was a great idea, we should be supportive, that it maybe lacked a little detail. But the meme was written – Greens are bad, silly Greens, silly idea.
Jan6: “why you would blame the Greens for the poor state of climate policy in Australia over the last 10 years and not the Country Party?”
Because it was the non-stop destabilisation of the ALP by the greens that led to 10 years of LNP destruction. The greens were happy to write murdoch attack ads for them, and they continue to show that they have every intention of doing it again. But hey, they got more seats in a parliament on a burning world, so as far as the greens are concerned, job well done.
jan 6
They took the environment vote out of political play.
The environment vote is not only IN play, but it currently has the BoP.
The fossil fuel cartel took the environmental vote out of play for a decade.
The environment is now branded a left wing issue thanks to the Greens choosing to be a left wing party instead of being like the Teals.
The Teal broke the parliamentary control of the fossil fuel cartel.
Mexb: “The environment is now branded a left wing issue thanks to the Greens choosing to be a left wing party instead of being like the Teals.”
Damn straight. In the UK, renewable energy is neither a left nor right issue. It’s the greens never-ending attacks on the ALP, whether they’re in government or opposition, that causes this.
Boerwar:
Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 2:18 pm
As you’d be aware, this trial basically concerns two interpretations of the same events. What the trial judge will do is weigh up the evidence of all the witnesses, coming to a conclusion as to their credibility, and their ostensible motivation. As you contend, it’s almost implausible that seven diggers would conspire to bring down Roberts-Smith on the basis of their dislike of him, jealously & other descriptors used by his counsel, which Besanko will address. I’d much prefer to be in the respondents’ position than BRS’s…
Mavis
Thank you.
The teals have certainly highlighted how much more effective the Greens could have been if they hadn’t become distracted by pursuing such a strong left wing agenda in other areas.
A centrally positioned Party focus on climate would have been one that neither major Party could have ignored.
After 30 years of a locked up environment vote the Reds finally have the power to block anything and everything in the Senate with 12 votes out of 76?
Now wonder the SOE is a sorry tale of woe!
BW: After 30 years of a locked up environment vote the Reds finally have the power to block anything and everything in the Senate with 12 votes out of 76?
After 30 years of a locked up environment vote the Reds finally have the power to block anything and everything in the parliament with 16 votes out of 227?
Amazed how Labor partisans deny their party’s involvement in the decade long fossil fuel cartel.
Amazed how greens partisans deny their party’s involvement in 30 years of environmental destruction.
The decade long fossil fuel cartel consisted of the three major parties, MSM owners, the banks, major super funds, the ASX, the think tanks.
Amazing the Greens can even get 10%.
Image the reaction to a Liberal politician saying environmentalism and conservatism go hand in hand.
Some people in the UK see this as leftist but most see this as middle of the road but here the debate is totally off.
Rex
The banks and superfunds are the ones leading the change and its their employees shareholders and members that swung to the Teals.
Rexy: “Amazing the Greens can even get 10%.”
Maybe you should reflect on why 85% of Australians hate the greens.
P at 3:07 pm
The Greens were only able to move into that voter ‘market segment’ because Labor had decided to no longer compete for it.
The elephant in the room is that there were and probably still are powerful voices within the Labor party against taking meaningful action re climate change. Perhaps if that had been sorted out we could have avoided much of the shite that went down in the Rudd/Gillard years .
Mexicanbeemer @ #180 Tuesday, July 19th, 2022 – 3:12 pm
True. But they cashed in on fossil fuels for a decade too long.
poroti: “probably still are powerful voices within the Labor party ”
And so it goes, never ending. The greens only care about attacking the ALP, and they wonder why the LNP is always in power.
EDIT: scratch that. They don’t wonder. They know what they’re doing. It’s always about getting more bums on seats in parliament, and they don’t care about how much of the environment they need to destroy to do it. If it wasn’t this way, they’d spend their time attacking the LNP. But that would be biting the hand that feeds them.
And you should look at the twittersphere today. Plibersek lays the hammer down on the environmental vandalism of the LNP over the past decade. But who are the greens attacking? The ALP.
Long time no see PBers. Hope everyone is well.
Just came to ask how hard is it for the ABC to get a HD feed of govt press confs from the blue room at APH?? It’s the principal location for press conferences. I’m not seriously suggesting a conspiracy, but I feel like I see so many low resolution clips of federal ministers, which I never noticed before the election – and not just on the ABC.
Another observation – Paul Kelly said today that we are at the beginning of a new wave of COVID, and it will get worse. Coupled with the economic challenges we’re facing, could we see a rally round the flag effect for the new government? Seems unlikely if Chalmers continues on this path of austerity (relative to the last two years).
It was the right call to reinstate the $750 isolation payment. It was absolutely a reversal – Labor took the position that it should end, and defended that position before changing their mind. All this crap about “inherited decisions” is driving me crazy. Still, it’s ridiculous that pollies get negative “backflip” coverage for being willing to change their mind.
Implicit in the Coalition (and Labr’s) decision to end the isolation payment was that people should just go to work when infectious, because COVID is becoming endemic and it doesn’t matter – not sure if I agree or disagree.
Alas, can’t wait for the opening of the 47th parliament!
Pi @ #186 Tuesday, July 19th, 2022 – 3:24 pm
Already tired of the Greens being the main story every day. Just like Canavan with the Coalition. As usual, the ABC blindly follows the narratives put out by corporate media.
hazza: “Already tired of the Greens being the main story every day.”
So am I hazza. So am I.
Pi
Agreed. I am a Greens NSW branch member & commonly a delegate to state councils, and the only things we talk about are how much we hate Labor and actually love the Coalition and all its policies, and how much we love destroying the environment and causing the bushfires.
You should re-read what you wrote and ask yourself if you really think that’s an accurate assessment.
Towering waves in Hawaii crash into homes, barrel through wedding venue
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/18/hawaii-waves-swell-south-pacific
hazza: “Already tired of the Greens being the main story every day.
___________
The who?
Apparently some dude named Jonno Duniam is Tanya’s shadow and has critisised her Press Club address for being political.
I had never heard of him checked with Google. Part of his Wikepedia entry says this: “His only job outside of politics has been frying chicken at KFC as a teenager”.
We was an adviser to Eric Abetz and is a right wing loon.
Ignore him.
Doolittle + Socrates
Interesting posts, thanks 🙂
Emilius: “and the only things we talk about are how much we hate Labor and love the Coalition, and how much we love destroying the environment and causing the bushfires.”
I’ll believe this isn’t the truth when I see the greens start attacking the LNP instead of constantly undermining the ALP. You can start by telling Bandt to pull his head in and get the climate legislation passed so we can build on it.
Emilius van der Lubben at 3:36 pm
And after your meeting everyone goes outside and jumps into their ………..
1967 Cadillac Eldorado convertible
Hot pink with whale skin hubcaps
And all leather cow interior
And big brown baby seal eyes for head lights (Yeah)
And I’m gonna drive in that baby at 115 miles per hour
Gettin’ one mile per gallon…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrgpZ0fUixs
@Granny Anny
He was top of the Tasmanian senate ticket for the Liberals & is a bit of an up-and-comer for the post-Abetz Tas Liberals seemingly. You can sense the Coalition has run out of ‘talent’ when people like him are in senior shadow ministry positions
Granny Anny @ #193 Tuesday, July 19th, 2022 – 3:39 pm
Just a younger cleaner version of Eric Abetz basically
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkamJScQUBY
Emilius van der Lubben @ #197 Tuesday, July 19th, 2022 – 3:43 pm
And you could say this about almost every shadow minister – including the “him” part.