An off week in the fortnightly cycles for both Newspoll and Essential Research, but we do have three fairly detailed sets of attitudinal polling doing the rounds:
• Ipsos has results from its monthly Issues Monitor series, which records a dramatic escalation in concern about the environment. Asked to pick the three most salient out of 19 listed issues, 41% chose the environment, more than any other. This was up ten on last month’s survey, and compares with single digit results that were not uncommonly recorded as recently as 2015. Cost of living and health care tied for second on 31%, respectively down three and up six on last month. The economy was up one to 25%, and crime down one to 21%. On “party most capable to manage environmental issues across the generations”, generations up to and including X gave the highest rating to the Greens, towards whom the “boomer” and “builder” generations showed their usual hostility. The poll was conducted online from a sample of 1000.
• A poll by YouGov for the Australian Institute finds 79% expressing concern about climate change, up five since a similar poll in July. This includes 47% who were very concerned, up ten. Among those aged 18 to 34, only around 10% expressed a lack of concern. Fifty-seven per cent said Australia was experiencing “a lot” of climate change impact, up 14%; 67% said climate change was making bushfires worse, with 26% disagreeing; and only 33% felt the Coalition had done a good job “managing the climate crisis” (a potentially problematic turn of phrase for those who did not allow that there was one), compared with 53% who took the contrary view. The poll was conducted January 8 to 12 from a sample of 1200; considerable further detail is available through the full report.
• The Institute of Public Affairs has a poll on Australia Day and political correctness from Dynata, which has also done polling on the other side of the ideological aisle for the aforesaid Australia Institute. This finds 71% agreeing that “Australia Day should be celebrated on January 26” (55% strongly, 16% somewhat), and 68% agreeing Australia had become too politically correct (42% strongly, 26% somewhat). Disagreement with both propositions was at just 11%. A very substantial age effect was evident here, but not for the two further questions relating to pride in Australia, which received enthusiastic responses across the board. I have my doubts about opening the batting on this particular set of questions by asking if respondents were “proud to be an Australian”, which brings Yes Minister to mind. Perhaps the most interesting thing about the poll is the demographic detail on the respondents, who were presumably drawn from an online panel. This shows women were greatly over-represented in the younger cohorts, while the opposite was true among the old; and that the sample included rather too many middle-aged people on low incomes. The results would have been weighted to correct for this, but some of these weightings were doing some fairly heavy lifting (so to speak).
Elsewhere, if you’re a Crikey subscriber you can enjoy my searing expose on the electoral impact of Bridget McKenzie’s sports sports. I particularly hope you appreciate the following line, as it was the fruit of about two days’ work:
When polling booth and sport grants data are aggregated into 2288 local regions designated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, there turns out to be no correlation whatsoever between the amount of funding they received and how much they swung to or against the Coalition.
I worked this out by identifying the approximate target locations of 518 grants, building a dataset recording grant funding and booth-level election swings for each of the ABS’s Statistical Local Area 2 regions, and using linear regression to calculate how much impact the grants had on the Coalition vote. The verdict: absolutely none whatsoever.
I think people should only be allowed to take part in a poll about Australia Day *after* they’ve correctly answered a question about what event it commemorates.
The number of people who think it marks Cook’s arrival!
Look, I’m not jealous because I don’t play golf, but…
Equinor….Norwegian company specialised in monetising fossil oil. We can make a contribution to Norway’s SWF.
Driving the Bight is a Federal issue. How good it would be right now to have a Federal Labor Government….a Government that would likely disallow drilling.
Too bad. 25 years of Green-aching have utterly disabled environmental politics in this country. Drilling in the Bight is a national disgrace for which the Greens are partly responsible.
BiTP
While there are two stories about how McKenzie got her club membership the main issue with the Club grant is that McKenzie was not only in a perceived but an actual conflict of interest. As a member she has a direct financial interest in the Club.
But that is not the main issue here. Littleproud’s defence of McKenzie this morning was practically an admission that McKenzie is gone. Here is why:
Under the relevant Act the Sports Commission has the legal authority to approve the grants. Not the Minister. Unless there was a workaround involving some sort of authority transfer, the sports grants were almost certainly made illegally. The Audit Report stated that it was unable to determine the authority for McKenzie’s decisions. This is ‘Oh, no, Prime Minister’ for, ‘The Audit was unable to find a paper trail which would justify McKenzie’s behaviour.’
Have no doubt that, when it discovered the gaping hole in the authority trail, Audit would have gone straight to the Sports Commission with a please show us the paper work. There would immediately have been a search for same. Minister’s offices and certainly the Minister herself would have been advised that there was a problem. The Prime Minister’s Department Secretary would have been advised and that worthy would have made sure the Prime Minister was aware that there was a largish hole. Similarly, as head of the Nationals, and as Deputy Prime Minister, McCormack would have been advised.
Prima facie it is looking increasingly as if McKenzie is a $100 million thief. She approved the grants without having the legal authority so to do. If the grants were made without any legal authority the grants would presumably have to be drawn back in. They are essentially stolen monies. Some sort of process involving the Commission using its legal authority to approve projects would then have to be gone through. Given that the Commission had ‘recommended’ a very different set of projects, it would presumably fulfil its legal authority by approving grants consistent with its own recommendations. (Very awkward if it miraculously decided that it wanted to grant $100 million to a series of corrupt political shonks while every single grassroots sports club in Australia looks on!)
This would leave the Government with the problem of much of the illegal grants money have been fully or partially expended, leaving their faves in the red.
When did Scotty from Marketing learn there was a $100 million problem?
Why did Scotty from Marketing not act as soon as he was advised that there was a mess?
Why is Scotty from Marketing protecting a corrupt minister?
When did McCormack learn that $100 million had been approved without authority?
Why did not McCormack act as soon as he learned that $100 million had been approved without authority?
There are other unanswered questions:
When was the Sports Grants Budget lifted from $30 million to $100 million?
Who made the decision to triple the Budget?
Why was this decision made?
When did Morrison learn about the ‘special rules’ being used to prioritize funding to Liberal and National Party political priorities?
When did McCormack learn about the ‘special rules’ being used to prioritize funding to Liberal and National Party political priorities?
When did Morrison learn that his electorate was to be favoured by an illegal decision?
This one has an enormous way to go. McKenzie is gone. This will trigger a leadership stoush in the Nationals.
@PpollingNumbers tweets
#NEW National @SurveyUSA GE Poll:
Sanders 52 (+9)
Trump 43
Biden 50 (+7)
Trump 43
Bloomberg 49 (+7)
Trump 42
Buttigieg 47 (+3)
Trump 44
Warren 48 (+3)
Trump 45
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=a98a06be-92cb-493f-a04a-b14c72c8c0e9
equinor statoil
Google it.
Xoanon
It being basically “NSW Day” needs to be drummed into people’s heads. It will make moving to a better date way easier.
@GeoffRBennett tweets
I just asked @SenSanders for his reaction to @HillaryClinton saying “no one likes” him. He said, “On a good day, my wife likes me, so let’s clear the air on that one.” He then pivoted to talking about impeachment. More tonight on @NBCNightlyNews
Boerwar
OK, so who is the most useless of the Nats? That’ll be the answer and it may not even be Barnaby.
I see that the same political fools who Killed Gore, Clinton, and Shorten are now working over Biden and Warren.
Xoanon
I’ve always thought of it as a Sydney thing.
BW
Obviously you cannot read polls
I really have enjoyed watching Adam Schiff through the day. He’s quite impressive,
Even though there’s been talk of a class-action over SportsGate, it’s a political rather than a legal problem, and it’s comprehensible to most, which makes it easier for the Opposition to prosecute. Gun-totting Bridgette’s clubs received $36,000; Porter’s and Morrisson’s electorates did pretty good out of it too, and plenty of others. The crux of the matter is that this arrogant government thinks it’s situation normal. I think they’re going to have second thoughts once the matter is fully exposed in the Senate.
guytaur @ #254 Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020 – 2:35 pm
So in other words the Dems are locked in for a win regardless of who they put up.
Unless perhaps they blow it with idiotic internecine bullshit like Clinton vs. Sanders. How hard is it to put away the knives and act like a team for one fucking election cycle?
ar
With Sanders strongest against Trump according to that poll the Democrats should be right behind Sanders.
You won’t see it. The moneyed consultants careers are under threat.
BK
I havent been watching the Senate proceedings. But I agree with you re Adam Schiff. He and Pelosi have been excellent in this space. Despite the Republican senators being without any moral fibre whatsoever.
Nicholas @ #236 Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020 – 2:57 pm
Amazing how far being Pale, Male and Stale in a State that has the highest quotient of Pale, Male and Female, and Stale constituents, can get you. 😐
BK @ #263 Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020 – 3:43 pm
I think he would be a worthy successor to Nancy Pelosi, as Leader of the House and Speaker, when she retires.
Why would you go to the AFP to find out?
…
@BlakandBlack
·
29m
What do you know – it would seem that @AusFedPolice is now the official media outlet for the government – has there been a Dutton putsch that I’m unaware of?
It will be hilarious if Hillarys ‘Kill Bernie’ agenda works the other way 😆
https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/german-retail-giant-kaufland-abandons-australia-despite-millions-in-investment-20200122-p53tqe.html
The winter is coming.
God the liberals should have tired harder to loose the election.
Cat
Several polls have Sanders in front in California. Delegate rich. It makes Sanders the front runner for the nomination. Biden has to play catch up.
guytaur:
[‘With Sanders strongest against Trump according to that poll the Democrats should be right behind Sanders.’]
Despite the poll you posted, there is no way that Sanders will win the Democratic nomination – I’d bet my bottom dollar on that. The dark horse is Bloomberg, who has more money than you can pock a stick at, meaning he can spend all his time on the campaign trail. March 4 will be the day to watch. My money’s still on Great Uncle Joe Biden, such a folksy kind of guy, who the electorate will warm to.
ar
Hilary ? 👿
I now believe there must be a basic test for all Liberal candidates.
“Can you tell thumping great lies with a straight face?”
This sports stuff is fun.
http://melbournerugby.com.au/alp-sports-facilities-funding-package-2019-higgins/
Mavis
The panic from Clinton is for good reason. Biden does badly in Iowa New Hampshire and Nevada bye bye campaign. South Carolina won’t save him. Steyer’s advertising has been making an impact.
Iowa and Nevada being Caucus states not straight Primaries gives Sanders an advantage of outperforming the polls according to history from 2016
guytaur @ #266 Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020 – 2:47 pm
Why? They’re all ahead of Trump; it’s not like there’s any bonus for beating Trump by an extra point or so*.
For now Democrats should be behind whichever candidate personally appeals to them the most, without slagging any of the other candidates (save the slagging for Trump, ffs!) and with a commitment to get loudly behind whomever the final nominee ends up being.
* Well actually, Electoral College. But you (probably) can’t translate raw national percentages to an EC tally anyways. You’d need to run the poll on a state-by-state basis if you really want a useful assessment of who beats Trump by how much.
I would not have a clue as to when, why or how any city other than Sydney was settled
ar
Go with the strongest candidate. You lose momentum in the General election compared to the Primaries. Why take risks? Answer. Consultants careers are on the line.
The party has moved left and embraced Sanders agenda. Its no big surprise Sanders is the front runner. He has been setting the agenda in the Democratic party for some time.
‘Mavis says:
Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 3:44 pm
Even though there’s been talk of a class-action over SportsGate, it’s a political rather than a legal problem’
If the Minister approved the grants without the authority to approve the grants then it is a legal problem as well as a political problem.
Shellbell
Not even The Wolf and Romulus and Remus?
Shellbell, election commitments is a whole different thing to a grant system where applications are made.
BW
Fair point. Aussie cities save as to Canberra.
Rick Wilson interview : I think Wilson knows a bit more about US candidates/elections than us in Oz
You’re not a fan of Bernie Sanders in your book. You like Liz Warren more. What does it matter if it’s Bernie or Joe Biden or Buttigieg?
Well, I think Warren or Biden or Buttigieg are all viable candidates. Bernie Sanders is Donald Trump election insurance. I honestly believe it.
Why?
He’s 300 years old. He just had a heart attack. He is every cliché ever, in the history of the free shit movement. Republicans will turn Bernie into the worst caricature you’ve ever seen. He is the scary old socialist figure of their nightmares. But in this case, it’s not fake. He’s actually that guy. He’s got an unbelievably thick oppo file. They’re salivating over this guy. I still talk to guys in the mafia, in the Republican mafia. They’re working their hardest to make sure Bernie’s the nominee. They want Bernie to be the nominee. Bernie will lose every single state south of the Mason Dixon Line. No questions asked, including Florida, which you can’t lose Florida.
Right, so are you saying there’s more potential traction and resonance with Bernie as a candidate than it would be for Biden because people know Biden?
First off, Bernie is not a Democrat. He’s got a party that he wants to use as a host vector into the nomination. Who loves Bernie? Young voters love Bernie.
Yes, they do.
Young voters adore Bernie. You know what young voters don’t do? They don’t vote. Old people vote. You know who really, really votes? Very old people. You know who really votes in Florida, the No. 1 key swing state? Really goddamn old people, like people on respirators vote in Florida. They’re old, old, old. And they vote like a champ. And that is not their demo. They tend to like Warren or Biden a little more. But, look, nobody’s perfect. To quote, Donald Rumsfeld, “You go to war with the army you have, not the one you want.” None of these guys are perfect. And there’s no generational superstar in this field. There’s no Barack Obama or Bill Clinton or JFK in this field.
MORE : https://www.salon.com/2020/01/16/rick-wilson/
guytaur:
Wednesday, January 22, 2020 at 4:05 pm
While personally liking Bernie, he’s far too left for the US electorate. I can’t think of an American president who got the top gig with such a leftish agenda. He reminds me of Corbyn, who has arguably caused the Labour Party to be out of office for a least a decade.
PR
Michael Moore is backing Sanders. His record is better than Wilson’s on predicting Trump would win.
Wilson is just one opinion.
Of course career consultant and GOP types don’t want the change Sanders represents.
Mavis
Too far left according to whom?
Politics has changed in the US. Sanders is known to appeal to Trump voters. He appeals to Independent voters. He appeals to Black and Latino voters. The most mentioned career out of the millions of individual grass roots campaigners are teachers.
The socialist bogeyman has died. The Right killed it crying wolf so many times.
Id love to see the gay guy win.
Heads exploding everywhere! 🙂
Cud
Yeah. 🙂
Its not going to happen. Its Warren Biden or Sanders. Buttigieg has been falling in polls almost down to Klobuchar and Yang levels.
Boerwar:
[‘If the Minister approved the grants without the authority to approve the grants then it is a legal problem as well as a political problem.’]
It could be but I don’t think it will be.
Mavis
Do you think they would have won with a full on ‘remainer” at the helm ?
guytaur:
[‘Too far left according to whom?’]
According to his policies:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/
He’s even more left than the Australian Greens, and that’s saying something.
Cud Chewer @ #290 Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020 – 3:20 pm
https://youtu.be/7gOBHvVTnnE?t=4
(you need Russian technology to get a Simpsons clip onto Youtube, apparently)
PhoenixRed
Wilson is spot on. Rule number one. Anything Guytaur suggests. You do the complete opposite. In other words. Sanders is the worst possible candidate
And guytaur dont bother engaging with me in this topic. I know you are for Sanders and I say you are 1000 percent wRONg
Mavis
That does not mean he will fail to win.
Look at what Trump campaigned on. Some very left stuff. Lies but thats what he appealed to.
All the indications we have are that Sanders appeals to the hard to turn out voters that stayed home in the Clinton campaign. That means Sanders has the best chance of getting that turnout increased. The older voters will turn out and vote Democrat. The younger ones will turn out and vote Sanders.
guytaur
“Of course career consultant and GOP types don’t want the change Sanders represents.”
Nor do most Americans. You seem incapable of grasping this.
The Blairites killed Corbyn and now the Clintonites are killing Bernie…