Three new federal poll results:
• The monthly Resolve Strategic poll from Nine Newspapers has Labor up two to 30%, the Coalition up one to 38%, the Greens down one to 12% and One Nation down one to 5%. This pollster does not provide two-party preferred, but if the 15% none-of-the-above vote is treated as a single (it includes an unlikely 12% independent vote), the result is almost exactly 50-50 based on preference flows in 2022. Both leaders are steady on approval and down a point on disapproval, Anthony Albanese to 35% and 52% and Peter Dutton to 41% and 41%, with Albanese’s lead as preferred prime minister out from 35-34 to 38-35. The poll also finds a telling 55% professing no opinion as to which party has better handled the situation in the Middle East, with 22% favouring “Peter Dutton and the Liberals” and 18% “Anthony Albanese and Labor”. It was conducted Monday to Sunday from a sample of 1606.
• The weekly Roy Morgan poll had a tie on two-party preferred after a 51-49 result to the Coalition last time, from primary votes of Labor 31.5% (up one-and-a-half), Coalition 37.5% (down half), Greens 12.5% (down one) and One Nation 5.5% (up one). Using the two-party measure based on 2022 election flows, Labor leads 52-48, out from 51.5-48.5 The poll was conducted Monday to Sunday from a sample of 1697.
• The Guardian’s routine early drop of the fortnightly Essential Research poll doesn’t include voting intention results. Stay tuned for later today on that one.
UPDATE: Essential Research’s voting intention results have Labor up three points to 32%, the Coalition down one to 34%, the Greens steady on 12%, One Nation steady on 8%, and undecided unchanged at 5%. The 2PP+ measure has Labor leading 49-47, with the balance undecided, after trailing 48-47 a fortnight ago. Further questions find fully 40% saying “our political system needs fundamental change”, compared with 48% who think it “needs some reform but is fundamentally sound” and only 12% who think it is “working well”. A semi-regular question on Israel’s military action in Gaza records, for some reason, an eight-point rise in “unsure” since August to 32%: 32% favour Israel’s permanent withdrawal, down seven, 18% a temporary ceasefire, down three, and 19% consider Israel’s actions justified, up two. The poll was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1139.
meher baba says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:27 pm
BW: “The BOP in the current Israeli Government is held by parties whose leaders and members have very clearly expressed various elements of genocidal intent.”
——————————————————————————–
The BOP in Australian Parliaments has sometimes been held by parties or independents who have some pretty out there views. Doesn’t mean those views represent the policy of the government of the day.
….’
=============================
They do, however, control the actions of the Israeli Government. Apart from that, Likud also does ‘From the River to the Sea’.
‘e.g.w. says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:32 pm
FUBARsays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 3:12 pm
says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 3:01 pm
Saxons were at one point migrant tribes.
The Angles should put land rights claims against the Saxons and Normans.
Vikings, Scots, Picts and Celts want in too.
Gauls have lodged an expression of interest.
Trying to find some Romans to assess their position, but hard to find.
Oh, and don’t leave out the Jutes or there really will be trouble!’
———————
Typical. You left out us Frisii.
So by that principle it would be ok for Israel to kill 1500 Gazans and then wait for HAMAS to slaughter another 1500 Israelis (as they surely would, being their stated intention) and then kill another 1500 Gazans. Rinse and repeat.
I prefer a principle that says if you start a war by killing 1500 innocent men, women and children (not to mention the rapings and beheadings) you don’t get to choose what is proportional for your chosen enemy to respond with.
‘meher baba says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:38 pm
Re the ethics of what Israel is doing.
I haven’t studied international law, but it seems to me that those who decry Israel’s attacks as war crimes are effectively saying that, if a belligerent in any war chooses to use innocent civilians as human shields, then they should consequently be immune from any sort of counter attack and should be permitted to continue attacking innocent civilians on the other side with impunity.
If that’s an accurate interpretation of the international law then (as I’ve long suspected), international law is a load of crap.’
—————————
When I pointed out straight after October 7 that I could not see how Israel could respond effectively short of committing war crimes I was shouted down.
BW: “Apart from that, Likud also does ‘From the River to the Sea’.”
——————————————————————————
I’m certainly no fan of Likud. But can you provide a source for this claim?
All I can find online is suggestions by opponents of Israel that Netanyahu’s policy is analogous to “from the river to the sea.” Which is crap.
Remember, more than 20 per cent (and growing) of the Israeli population are Arab Muslims, Christians and Druze. A further 5 per cent comprise historic minority communities of the region (eg, Samaritans) or immigrants from all over the world. It’s a multicultural society, as opposed to the Islamic State that the Iranians, Hezbollah and Hamas would like to impose upon the region.
I could add that Israel has vibrant LGBT+ communities, a strong environmental movement which has achieved policy changes, and a history of strong woman leaders all the way back to Golda Meir. All the sorts of things that Western lefties normally embrace, except that, when it comes to Israel, they are firmly on the side of the boys who want to bring all the fun of the Taliban to the shores of the Mediterranean.
mb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea
meher babasays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:38 pm
Re the ethics of what Israel is doing.
I haven’t studied international law, but it seems to me that those who decry Israel’s attacks as war crimes are effectively saying that, if a belligerent in any war chooses to use innocent civilians as human shields, then they should consequently be immune from any sort of counter attack and should be permitted to continue attacking innocent civilians on the other side with impunity.
If that’s an accurate interpretation of the international law then (as I’ve long suspected), international law is a load of crap.
——————-
Using civilians as human shields is seen as a war crime because belligerent forces are supposed to be easily identifiable and to not endanger non-combatant civilians.
meher baba says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:52 pm
BW: “Apart from that, Likud also does ‘From the River to the Sea’.”
——————————————————————————
I’m certainly no fan of Likud. But can you provide a source for this claim?
All I can find online is suggestions by opponents of Israel that Netanyahu’s policy is analogous to “from the river to the sea.” Which is crap.
Remember, more than 20 per cent (and growing) of the Israeli population are Arab Muslims, Christians and Druze….’
==================
Which would be why there have been calls by some Israeli extremists for the ethnic cleansing of Israel.
Have the Greens had enough stunting against Labor’s latest housing initiative?’
Are the delays long enough this time?
Time to announce a victory and fold?
What?
MB
With Israel one of a handful of countries not signed to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, I would suggest that Iran’s nuclear ambitions is one of the worst examples of bothsideism you could use.
Indeed, one of the craziest aspects of this crazy conflict is how few people insist on Israel relinquishing nuclear weapons and signing the npt as part of a final settlement. You would think a political platform of “first priority is that no-one in the volatile Middle East should have access to nuclear weapons” would have be a popular, common-sense position. It might well be, but no-one’s running with it.
Meher Baba that would be correct but you need to find proof of human shields being used.
How things used to be is that you could kill as many civilians as you want, as long as you target military infrastructure. The Israeli gov used to tow this line early in the war, claiming that they were targeting Hamas in schools, but they were very bad at it, such as the Hamas calendar and bunker which were relentlessly mocked as blatant and embarrassing lies.
Essentially what this means is that having a military asset in a city does not mean you have human shields. A human shield is like stringing a Palestinian prisoner to a jeep so you aren’t fired upon. Or taking somebody hostage in front of guns.
What is bewildering to me is that Netanyahu seems to know exactly where all of Hezbollah are, where all of Hamas are, wherever in the world, hell they even know where the families of Al Jazeera journalists are living in refugee camps, yet they cannot produce a shred of evidence of ‘human shields’ actually being used, nor evidence of any of the civilian infrastructure they have bombed being used by terrorists.
Well… maybe not just the extremists:
https://www.reuters.com/article/world/about-half-of-israeli-jews-want-to-expel-arabs-survey-finds-idUSKCN0WA1HI/
Boerwar,
I agree.
BW: “When I pointed out straight after October 7 that I could not see how Israel could respond effectively short of committing war crimes I was shouted down.”
——————————————————————————-
Not by me. I’ve tried to refrain from commenting on this topic as much as I can, but some of the stuff being posted today has gotten my dander up big time and I’ve been unable to resist the temptation to respond.
I suspect William might be having a deserved day off, but I think this had better be my last post on this matter for now, as I agree with our lord and master that any debate on PB on this subject tends to generate more heat than light.
NathanAsays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:58 pm
MB
With Israel one of a handful of countries not signed to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, I would suggest that Iran’s nuclear ambitions is one of the worst examples of bothsideism you could use.
————-
Israel hasn’t threatened its neighbours but Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map.
‘Bean says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:58 pm
Meher Baba that would be correct but you need to find proof of human shields being used.
….’
===========================
Apologists abound.
What sort of ‘proof’ are you looking for, exactly?
Military tunnels and military bunkers under all known forms of civilian infrastructure?
Gun fights in an around every known form of civilian infrastructure?
Sympathetic detonations of large munitions dumps under elements of civilian infrastructure?
A complete lack of Hamas fighting positions located in anything other than civilian infrastructure?
Fubar…
Your just announced defence of the IDF of “Get out of town or take the consequences” is about as weak as they come.
You are suggesting the citizens of Gaza were either too slow or too stupid (or whatever) to take the advice of the IDF and thereby they are to blame for being killed by the IDF.
Your logic has deserted you on this one soldier.
A more honest response from you would be something along the lines of the Israelis were/are so incandescent with rage over the death of 1500 of their own, not to mention the hostages – that they did not care who they killed to “teach Hamas a lesson”. While reprehensible, this revenge act would at least be understandable.
There is no moral high ground for the Israelis on this one….or for Hamas and any of their supporters either.
@Boewar
Really highlights the meaningless of ‘two-state solution’. Israel is not interested, and Hamas’ claim of accepting it has yet to be tested.
It reminds me of this article from Feb 2023,
https://www.vox.com/world-politics/2023/2/23/23609584/israel-right-wing-young-voters-palestine
“A joint poll published by the Israel Democracy Institute last month found that 73 percent of Jewish Israelis between ages 18 and 24 identify as right-wing, compared with only 46 percent of Jewish Israelis over 65.”
If Israeli TikTok is anything to go by, that 73 percent number seems pretty accurate. I remember seeing a video from there filtered to Instagram and it was a bunch of kids in straight up blackface, with bones in their noses, making fun of Ethiopian jews. Was absolutely wild to see in the 21st Century.
Mexicanbeemer says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 5:02 pm
NathanAsays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 4:58 pm
MB
With Israel one of a handful of countries not signed to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, I would suggest that Iran’s nuclear ambitions is one of the worst examples of bothsideism you could use.
————-
Israel hasn’t threatened its Neighbours…’
===================
Source? I had thought that Israel has done just that using back channels.
Boerwar
Source? I had thought that Israel has done just that using back channels.
———————–
That’s playing politics.
Has Centre been around? I haven’t seen him comment since last week, but admittedly I haven’t been on this post too often.
bean
Iran plus Heshbollah, Hamas and the Houthis have all made genocidal statements. For these players, while a ‘two state solution’ might be a useful interim unicorn, it can not meet the top level vision statement which is to push the jews into the sea.
“Israel hasn’t threatened its Neighbours”
Brother they are invading the UN-recognised, 1/3 Christian, sovereign nation of Lebanon as we speak.
And yeah Boewar, thats why I said it’s untested. It’s politically convenient to say you are for it when you know Israel will never agree to it.
That being said I do believe in general Palestinians would be in favour of it, if it brought any measure of peace or stability to Palestine then I think Palestinians would be all for it, I don’t know who wouldn’t be after going through literal hell for a year.
MB
I try to stay non partisan on the MEe conflicts. I don’t know enough.
But I would no sooner go to a pro Hamas demonstration than to a pro Isreali one. Either way I would be supporting war crimes.
‘Mexicanbeemer says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 5:06 pm
Boerwar
Source? I had thought that Israel has done just that using back channels.
———————–
That’s playing politics.”
==================
It is a serious issue.
IMO, the Forever War will eventually be ‘resolved’ by mushroom clouds.
Beansays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 5:08 pm
“Israel hasn’t threatened its Neighbours”
Brother they are invading the UN-recognised, 1/3 Christian, sovereign nation of Lebanon as we speak.
———————
Yes but they are not threatening to conquer the place and are not using nukes.
‘Bean says:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 5:08 pm
“Israel hasn’t threatened its Neighbours”
Brother they are invading the UN-recognised, 1/3 Christian, sovereign nation of Lebanon as we speak.’
===================
The specific context made it clear that the issue was whether Israel had threatened to use nuclear weapons against its neightbours.
A Labor rat squeaks and squeaks:
https://citynews.com.au/2024/payman-promises-full-body-contact-party/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_source_platform=mailpoet&utm_campaign=canberra-daily-today-s-news-today_7801
You have channeled me Ms Confessions,
Logged in 2 mins ago.
So how have you been?
Shellbell,
Watson’s mentee. He looks a good ‘un.
Can you answer the question of Gilkes? What is he and what does he do?
Spud is painting himself into a corner with his compulsive politicking of the wars in the Middle East. He’s obsessed with the Middle East and is giving the impression to the electorate that he cares about the Middle East more than he cares about the Australians.
My bad, I misread. Yeah I don’t think they have then, they try to keep it as secret as possible. I’m guessing the implication is the threat, much like other nuclear armed minor-powers like North Korea and Iran.
Anyhoo, back to the ME moratorium for me.
Centre!
I’m well. I suppose you heard about my mother’s medical emergency on Friday that kept me at RPA ED for most of the day. What a day that was!
Yeah lol thanks for the reminder BW. Trying to stay off the topic because it fills me with much despair, but being my birthday and the anniversary of the attack, it has come to mind again.
I have to do a Nellie Melba in relation to one point BW raised.
There is no doubt that Israeli society is shifting due to the rising proportion of the population which is Orthodox and/or descended from Middle Eastern Jews as opposed to the generally more liberally-minded Ashkenazim of Europe and (predominantly) the USA. These people definitely tend to be far more right-wing and anti-Arab, and are pushing the country in an undesirable direction. Albeit that, in many ways, they are simply reciprocating the hardening of Muslim attitudes in the regions immediately around them (albeit less so in the Gulf).
Israel’s continuing prosperity depends on support from the diaspora: particularly the strong influence the US Jewish community exerts in relation to the policies of US governments of either colour. Up to now it has been pretty clear that the US will not support an ethnic cleansing policy on the part of the Israeli Jews.
I do worry a bit about a potential return of Trump. Netanyahu certainly seems to hope that President Trump Mark 2 will give him carte blanche to do whatever he wants to Arabs/Palestinians both within Israel’s borders and in the West Bank and Gaza.
However, I think it would be silly for any Israeli government to assume that Trump will always be their friend. He’s shown that he’s happy to run with both anti-semites and isolationists. If they get hold of him on the right day, he might suddenly decide that war in the Middle East is costing the US far too much and that it needs to stop immediately.
Fess, no I did not hear.
That’s awful, hope your mother is ok.
I was very surprised not to see you last Friday, given you organised it, but as long as you (and your mum) are ok.
@Meher Baba
That is a good analysis regarding Trump. Historically Republicans have been the ones who force Israel to tow the line. On top of that Trump is a media man, he understands bad news better than most, and he can probably see clearly that the war is bad media for everybody involved. Whether he’ll do anything is another thing. I seriously doubt he has the mental capacities for office, and counting on Trump to do something expected is just as folly for any of us as it is for right-wing parties in any country. And then yes the American right-wing and his newer base is not friendly to Jewish people. Some are friendly to Israel because they see it as a realisation of the ethnostate that they wish to create for all minorities (though this is something I see more with Australian right-wing groups), but even in those cases they are still racist and anti-semitic.
Centre:
We went to emergency at 7.30 that morning with mum complaining of chest pains. We didn’t get to leave until well after 2pm and by the time I got home I was starving (why don’t they feed you in ED when they keep you there all day?) and just wanted to crash in front of the TV. It was SUCH an ordeal.
She’s good though, just some gastric reflux which apparently has similar symptoms to heart attack.
MB
Israel is bombing neighbours as we speak, and had ministers propose nuking Gaza, to be suspended for breaking the “nuclear ambiguity”.
I don’t really see how the position of “well everyone can have nuclear weapons if you don’t threaten anyone” is a prudent or politically popular diplomatic position to take.
“ First Dog thinks he is the conscience of this nation.
There, fixed it”
C@tmomma, I thought you were ignoring me on a account of:
“No, Eddy, you are Pavlov’s Dog who salivates whenever the bells are rung by those whose specialty is cultivating disgust in democratically-elected Centre Left governments. It’s so sadly predictable.”
And that is just revealing who you truly are.
And to all the Bludgers who were at the lunch last Friday, to those who tipped the Storm.
One word from Centre…
Ooolaalaa
4 in a row 🙂
Fess
Good to hear all is well 🙂
Quite right.
Labor is just so half-arsed, at best, in much of what they do.
“So by that principle it would be ok for Israel to kill 1500 Gazans and then wait for HAMAS to slaughter another 1500 Israelis (as they surely would, being their stated intention) and then kill another 1500 Gazans. Rinse and repeat.
I prefer a principle that says if you start a war by killing 1500 innocent men, women and children (not to mention the rapings and beheadings) you don’t get to choose what is proportional for your chosen enemy to respond with.”
While it is has for a long time been a bit of silliness to claim Israel was being disproportionate merely because historically (e.g. before October 7) it was a lot more successful at defending against terror attacks than Hamas, Islamic Jihad etc were at defending against the retaliation, proportionality has never meant matching casualty numbers, it is worse than silliness to declare that any attack permits carte blanche atrocities in reply.
I can’t tell you where the line was, but at some point in the past year Israel crossed it as any semblance of a military campaign to take our Hamas leaders and Hamas sites turned into a rolling maul over the entirety of Gaza with few clear military hits.
NathanAsays:
Tuesday, October 8, 2024 at 5:22 pm
MB
I don’t really see how the position of “well everyone can have nuclear weapons if you don’t threaten anyone” is a prudent or politically popular diplomatic position to take.
———————–
Cause you can’t see it because that isn’t my position.
Israel has nukes for decades but not used them but would Iran refrain from using them and that’s the foreign policy question.
@Rex: “Labor is just so half-arsed, at best, in much of what they do.”
No. Balanced.
Just as you guys say “no principles” when what you mean is Labor doesn’t agree with your principles (or claimed principles in your case, Rexy), you say half-arsed when what you mean is they only half agree with you.
No, half-arsed was the Greens’ argument for rent fixing which has now gone by the wayside.