Newspoll retains its comatose form in its latest fortnightly result, with Labor steady on 37%, the Coalition down a point to 35%, the Greens steady on 10% and One Nation steady on 9%, and Labor’s two-party lead unchanged on 54-46. Malcolm Turnbull’s personal ratings have worsened, down one on approval to 31% and up three on disapproval to 59%, while Bill Shorten is respectively down one to 32% and up one to 56%, with Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister at 41-33. Poll courtesy of The Australian; numbers helpfully related by GhostWhoVotes.
BB
No one is rewriting history of what happened. However we can point out the media not doing their job to tell the truth.
This is an ongoing fight. Making the big lie that a market mechanism is a tax should never have been allowed to stand.
Voice Endeavour + lizzie
Thank you for the reminders, It had become used the dial on their Blundermatic 2000 being turned up to 11.
Some refreshing honesty from Barnaby Joyce:
“To be quite frank I have a hard time trying to explain that to them.”
Indeed.
This was when he says the problem relates to the HC finding “and somehow you are not an Australian?”. What a gross miss-statement of facts. He completely omits the problem – his own failure to check or renounce his NZ citizenship.
Barnaby will probably find it even harder to explain why he kept collecting an extra $20k per month as DPM while his status was in limbo.
For God’s sake Guytaur, Gillard gift-wrapped “Carbon Tax” for them.
Bushfire Bill @ #349 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 3:16 pm
I agree, which I offered earlier as a reason Shorten will be harder for his enemies to nail when he is PM. Shorten is good on strategy, and probably would have found a different bone for the greens when negotiating the ETS. If he had been forced to go with the change from 1 year fixed price to 3 he would never have said “Call it a tax if you like”.
so much momentum…
BB
Only because the media did not do its job. Thats the problem
They settled for a gotcha short term thing when the actual fact is the long term was a market mechanism.
IF the media had called out the simple fact that a market mechanism is NOT a tax no gotcha. So media aided and abetted Abbot by not continually pointing out the big lie.
Thats the media fault. Thats the media not doing its job. Thats doing propaganda instead of journalism.
Bushfire Bill @ #353 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 3:24 pm
I can remember screaming “Noooo” at the TV when I saw Gillard concede the “tax” word on the 7:30 Report. Has 12 years of Howard taught us nothing?
Momentum might not be the best slogan for the Coalition. Momentum in the UK is a “left-wing British political organisation”, according to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum_%28organisation%29).
If one reads the comments below articles in, for example, the UK’s Daily Telegraph, there is quite frequent mention of Momentum, and never pleasantly.
“We are MOMENTUM you bet you are you bet I am” would have been more appropriate, methinks!
It was Cassidy’s wife (name?) who pushed and pushed the “carbon tax” until Julia agreed. I haven’t felt the same about her since.
Lizzie
Yep. No excuse for Gillard who should have known better.
Thats does nothing to excuse the media culture that has grown where Gillard should have expected the result.
It was a case of FACTS OVERBOARD.
As a result we have had ten years of climate deniers winning political debates.
ag0044 @ #358 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 3:31 pm
Perfect. Fits the way we call them the “Liberal” Party.
BTW I quite like the naming of the centre-right body the “International Democratic Union”. US Republicans and OZ Liberals are both members, and the title has words in it they both can’t stand.
CTar1 @ #327 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 1:28 pm
I guess you have to be from the States to consider ‘Cockburn’ a terrible name for just about anything?
I once received a threatening letter from a ‘Cockburn Legal’, whose logo was a very spiky and uncomfortable-looking circle-thingy. I almost fell over laughing, as such unsophisticated thuggery and implicit name-calling/intimidation was quite in keeping with the character of the person who had caused the letter to be sent.
Was rather surprised when, in the actual hearing, the lawyer introduced himself as a representative from “coh-BURN” legal. I guess the ‘ck’ is silent under the British/Australian pronunciation.
C@tmomma @ #334 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 1:50 pm
Am I the only one who thinks maybe she was making a physics reference, vis-à-vis Heisenburg?
As in, when you’re the momentum you don’t have to care about what your position (in the polls) happens to be. It’s a slogan that allows any number of consecutive bad Newspolls to be ignored.
I think P1 might be hanging out on the ABC site. 🙂
[Itwazza Shih Tzu 1 hour ago
Just to clarify that this is not about “human rights”. Opposite sex marriage is a human right according to the UN but same sex marriage is not.
In Joslin et al. v New Zealand, the United Nations Human Rights Committee held that “marriage” is a definitional construct which, by the expressed terms of Article 23(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), includes only persons of the OPPOSITE sex.]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/2017-10-30/fact-check-same-sex-marriage-and-uk-curriculum/9087024
Except, of course, in ‘normal’ politics saying “If you want to call it a carbon tax…’ would have been accepted for what it was, not made into something it wasn’t.
The media took a line of the Opposition’s, one that the Opposition’s leader of strategy now says was totally spurious, and ran with it.
If Julia Gillard had found herself on the wrong side of S44, the media would not be portraying her as a victim of an obscure point of law and suggesting that it was perfectly reasonable to expect the Constitution of Australia to be changed because she f***ed up. If she had misled the Senate and blamed a staffer, there’d have been calls for a Royal Commission.
If she had stood up in Parliament and said the High Court would make the decision she wanted them to make, the media would be howling unwarranted interference in our most sacrosanct institutions.
The rules were changed when Abbott was Oppo Leader (and Rudd got some of the same treatment, it must be said).
Gillard’s main problem was that no one realised the rules had changed until it was too late. She remained operating in the realm of ‘business as usual’, just as Rudd did, for that reason.
zoomster
Lindsay Tanner warned. He even wrote a book about the media circus.
guytaur
In 2012. We’re all wise in hindsight.
Zoom,
Totally agree there were different rules for Gillard. Same applies to how Turnbull is given infinite 2nd chances.
However, we had just seen an extended period of Howard, who would never answer a question he didn’t like, let alone concede anything to the opposition.
Do we have any QLD bludgers here? I am after marginal seat MP’s to send small donations to. Looking for progressive, socially open minded MPs to support. Must be fighting for a marginal seat though.
Had a few good tips for WA election looking for the same for QLD election.
zoomster
I though he was on QandA etc telling that point way before he wrote the book. Must be my memory is at fault.
I too am a victim of long term media narrative.
An ETS or the like should be framed as removing subsidies on fossil fuels that allow them to pollute with out charge or consequence.
Big D
First voters need to be hit on the head with a trading market is NOT a tax.
Then run your argument.
poroti
If the Russians behave themselves in Syria (only interfere if they think their long wanted Naval base is at risk) their presence may actually be a stabilising factor in Syria/Lebanon and Iraq. That they’re there checks the Turks somewhat as well I’d think.
…which reminds me of a friend of mine, who was interviewed at length for one of those ‘tell all’ political accounts so beloved of journalists.
A few of us had also been involved in the events described, and we tackled him one day about differences in his account and our memories of the time.
“No,” he said. “You’re all wrong. Look it up, it’s in the book – history will now record that that’s what happened.”
(I found it particularly amusing because I also knew the journo who had written the book…)
gt
I thought his value was somewhat less than that.
kloussikian: Lib replacement for Fiona Nash could have constitutional problem of her own as factional fight brews @dailytelegraph dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/liber…
https://twitter.com/kloussikian/status/924853635988652032
Is Labor next in line?
CT
😆
guytaur @ #376 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 4:04 pm
No on loves to see Libs in the shit more than me,
but nah.
The HC aren’t going to rule a person who was eligible at the time of the election but then went and got a job with the govt when they weren’t elected ineligible to take up the place they legitimately won on a a recount a year after the election required because someone else has fallen foul of s44. (and that’s assuming anyone was as much of a scumbag to refer her, which is pretty long odds because she’s from the party that has those sort of scumbags).
She’ll resign. The AEC will conduct the recount and life will go on.
Absolute GOLD if it turns out the government has appointed every possible successor to the disqualified senators into government sinecures and rendered them ineligible! Good one Brandis
Yeah admittedly unlikely, but who can say definitively without a referral to the Court of Disputed Returns? Hehee
billyeichner: Kevin Spacey has just invented something that has never existed before: a bad time to come out.
Unfortunately I think ratsak is on the money.
Remember it’s at the close of nominations that’s important.
It would be hilarious if it was otherwise. 🙂
Barnaby Joyce with super embedded ABC reporter at local pub:
There’s been lot’s of Barnaby at home his electorate photos / video over the last few days.
Just about all of them feature Barnaby with a schooner in his hand.
I hope he’s got a sober driver.
Barney in Go Dau @ #364 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 3:43 pm
No, it’s just that P1 can read and can differentiate fact from spin.
Seems there are a few others that can do so as well.
Earlier today some of my fellow Bludgers were noting that the L/NP had made it to midday on Monday without a clanger, and then others reassured them it was not far away. Well, the clanger came just after lunchtime in WA:
Barnaby Joyce dares Labor to bring legal challenges to his, Fiona Nash’s decisions
Former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce has dared the Labor Party and the union movement to bring a legal challenge against any of the decisions he oversaw before he was thrown out of Parliament by the High Court.
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/barnaby-joyce-dares-labor-to-bring-legal-challenges-to-his-fiona-nashs-decisions-20171030-gzavg5.html
What could possibly go wrong?
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
Section 44 deals with elections (date of nomination to declaration of returns) and sitting in Parliament.
Section 45 deals with disqualifications while a Senator causing a vacancy.
The questions arise as to whether or not this applies between an election and taking office and whether or not the entire time between nomination and declaring the result of a special recount constitute an election for the purposes of section 44. This means that it is hard to tell if she will be ruled as disqualified and if she is, how she is replaced (by special count electing Liberal Jim Molam or by the NSW Parliament as a casual vacancy).
This does increase the chance of a referendum on sections 44.
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/elon-musk-warns-australia-on-its-energy-supply-problems/news-story/c504c6102b70dc35a94a2c2a820dc22c
gt
I don’t suppose ‘Mr Musk’ gave a progress report on the delivery of his ‘massive’ advertisement?
Grimace
I imagine the first challenge would be about establishing how the “3 months rule” plays. Is it 3 months from finding out they are inelligible or 3 months from the election. Then subsequent cases (or a single case if it was about all decisions and their validity) could be made.
I don’t think Labor is planning to challenge anything themselves – they have simply warned that anyone who is disgruntled about a particular decision might.
As the elections of Joyce and Nash were declared invalid, the 3 month period should start from the date of the dissolutions (the 9th of May 2016) (as their previous elections have not been invalidated), however the decisions made before it was known they were ineligible will likely stand because of the way such situations are dealt with in law.
Good to see channel 10 news focus on the numbers that matter.
Disapproval 56 to 59 in a fortnight for Brian.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/oct/30/george-brandis-may-have-cost-would-be-liberal-senator-her-seat
[CTar1
There’s been lot’s of Barnaby at home his electorate photos / video over the last few days.
Just about all of them feature Barnaby with a schooner in his hand.
I hope he’s got a sober driver.]
I was going to comment that having a reporter embedded with him might highlight how big his drinking problem really is. 🙂
On Labor running a candidate, with Windsor out of the picture and with the national focus on the by election I think they definitely should and they should run it on national issues highlighting the Government’s failures and Labor’s alternative.
It matters little the result but with it being about the Deputy PM the national focus is justified.
kloussikian: The AAT has confirmed that Hollie Hughes, likely replacement for Fiona Nash in Senate, has resigned @dailytelegraph
Ides of March @ #390 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 2:01 pm
IIRC it has already been clarified that it was 3 months from the election – the HC has found they were not validly elected to begin with.
[zoomster
I don’t think Labor is planning to challenge anything themselves – they have simply warned that anyone who is disgruntled about a particular decision might.]
I think Burke made that pretty clear on Insiders yesterday.
Once again an example of the Coalition commenting on what they would like Labor to have said and not listening to what they actually said.
zoomster @ #391 Monday, October 30th, 2017 – 2:04 pm
Yeah and ‘wink wink nod nod’. The LNP s.44 debacle is the gift that keeps on giving for Labor.