MedVision ad

2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Rudd? (1 Viewer)

Coalition or Labor/Howard or Beazley?

  • Coalition

    Votes: 249 33.3%
  • Labor

    Votes: 415 55.5%
  • Still undecided

    Votes: 50 6.7%
  • Apathetic

    Votes: 34 4.5%

  • Total voters
    748

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Re: 2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Beazley?

wheredanton said:
To the dumb arse slow learner.

'Labor' not 'Labour'.

ooh ouch. :)

its just natural to write labour as opposed to labor for me. force of habit.
 

ihavenothing

M.L.V.C.
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
919
Location
Darling It Hurts!
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Re: 2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Beazley?

kaviii said:
really?...now i dont know about supporting him now, i am more of a pro-arab person>im australian born singaporean chinese< i always thought left wing usually are more pro arab than pro-israel...but i still iwant to see julia gillard on the top job
The Labor Party has always seen strong support for Israel and Jewish causes, most Jews still vote for them despite the idiots like Julia Irwin and Leo McLeay for opening their mouths and endangering an electorate concerned with Islamic terrorism, Michael Danby is the only Jewish MP and Bob Hawke was one of the most prominent supporters of Israel in the whole of Australian politics.
 

ihavenothing

M.L.V.C.
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
919
Location
Darling It Hurts!
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Re: 2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Beazley?

wheredanton said:
To the dumb arse slow learner.

'Labor' not 'Labour'.

It's Labour in the UK and New Zealand
 
Last edited:

Stott Despoja

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
97
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Re: 2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Beazley?

ihavenothing said:
It's Labour in the UK and New Zealand
Wow. That's amazing. There's a point to the above, I take it?
 

Stott Despoja

Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
97
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Re: 2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Beazley?

ihavenothing said:
Just another fun thing to do on a Sunday night
I prefer to listen to the ABC's Sunday Profile program.
 

ihavenothing

M.L.V.C.
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
919
Location
Darling It Hurts!
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Re: 2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Beazley?

After watching the terrible My Favourite Album I was turned off
 

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
In the words of tonights South Park episode:

Let's get out the vote! Let's make our voices heard!
We've been given the right to choose between a douche and a turd.
It's democracy in action! Put your freedom to the test.
A big fat turd or a stupid douche. Which do you like best?



:)
 

hazaar

Greenie
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
175
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
It is interesting to see that this poll directly reflects the latest AC Neilsen poll.
The margin is very similar.

BOS
47.01% Labor
36.65% Coalition

AC Nelisen- Two part preferred
56% Labor
44% Coalition

And under Rudd Labor's primary vote would rise to 48 per cent, compared with a stagnant 39 per cent for the Coalition.

I know polls vary but Labor has led consistently for the past nine months. I believe there is a real sentiment for change in Australia.
 

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
hazaar said:
I know polls vary but Labor has led consistently for the past nine months. I believe there is a real sentiment for change in Australia.
the polls mean fuck all. latham had a huge margin in the polls after he was elected leader of labor and he lost gloriously to howard and the liberals. every year the liberals are behind in the polls but every election they win by a margin. there is something wrong with the polls, they do not reflect the whole of australia and there is no sentiment for change (towards the opposition anyway). in that, labor has no chance of winning the next election.
 
Last edited:

Sarah168

London Calling
Joined
Dec 25, 2003
Messages
5,320
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
Haven't really thought much about this election until the leadership change yesterday but next year will my first time voting and it has always been Labor for me. The new leadership change just confirms it for me. Even though it will be difficult for him to win it, I'm a big supporter of Kevin Rudd.
 

frog12986

The Commonwealth
Joined
May 16, 2004
Messages
641
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
hazaar said:
It is interesting to see that this poll directly reflects the latest AC Neilsen poll.
The margin is very similar.

BOS
47.01% Labor
36.65% Coalition

AC Nelisen- Two part preferred
56% Labor
44% Coalition

And under Rudd Labor's primary vote would rise to 48 per cent, compared with a stagnant 39 per cent for the Coalition.

I know polls vary but Labor has led consistently for the past nine months. I believe there is a real sentiment for change in Australia.
And if you look at both the AC Nielsen polls, and BoS polls before the last election, the results are almost identical. The fact is that polls cannot encapsulate the sentiment within each electorate, particularly marginals, which are the votes that count.

Opinion polls have an inherent unreliability, particularly due to the seat structure of Australia's electoral system. For instance, if the poll was to include residents from four seats, Grayndler, Sydney, Bennelong and North Sydney, Labor would comfortable win the 2PP vote. Now whilst two seats are ALP and two LPA, the vastly greater margins of the ALP seats would indicate that overall a greater proportion of people are voting for the ALP.

I am not surprised that you are trying to milk the poll for all it's worth, but at the end of the day, as 2001 and 2004 confirm, it's meaningless..

The preferred Prime Minister and 'key issue' polls are the two indicators that people should be taking notice of..
 

Nick Minchin

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
40
Location
South Australia
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
hazaar said:
AC Nelisen- Two part preferred
56% Labor
44% Coalition
This poll is a quite obvious outlier result. It is inconsistent with the other recent polls (Newspoll and Morgan) and the medium term trend. A genuine 4% jump in TPP does not happen without a good reason. To get such a TPP result from the primaries implies that 75% of all minor party second preferences will go to Labor. This seems quite high. Not to mention the inherent flaws with opinion polling as pointed out by frog12986.

As for the BOS poll, do keep in mind that 1) People with secondary accounts can vote more than once. 2) People are unable to change their vote. Many voted on the poll months ago, so it may not accurately reflect current voting intentions. 3) The demographics of the forum. If you look at the Newspoll age breakdown, the 18-24 category is much more likely to vote Labor than the rest of the population. (by a margin of ~5-10%)

And under Rudd Labor's primary vote would rise to 48 per cent, compared with a stagnant 39 per cent for the Coalition.
An absolute fantasy this figure. I can tell you now that Labor will not be getting a 48% primary come election time. Rudd will have a honeymoon period. Give it a few months and his figures will return to reality as he settles into the job.
I also cite the example of the last dream team, Downer and Costello. The Coalition primary jumped 7% when Downer became leader of the libs. Less than a year later he was forced to resign. What matters is how Rudd ultimately performs in the job. He is not helped by polls like this and labels such as 'dream team' that only serve to inflate expectations. If he cant deliever on these inflated expectations he will be in trouble.

Beazley was dumped partly because Rudd is seen to be more popular with the electorate. In 1994, a Newspoll asked who should lead the Liberals. Bronwyn Bishop got 39 percent, while John Howard got 13. Howard became leader a year later, and well you know where he went from there.

I know polls vary but Labor has led consistently for the past nine months. I believe there is a real sentiment for change in Australia.
Mid-term polls mean nothing. Look back over the last few electoral cycles. In the end, it’s the election campaign period that really matters. I agree with frog's assessment. At this part of the electoral cycle at least, the key indicator is approval, satisfaction and preferred PM ratings. There are unlikely to be any meaningful figures for Rudd until he settles into the job. As for the issues ratings, these show that the coalition is seen as the best to manage the economy and national security. Most significantly the parties are tied on education and close on health. (Issues you'd think Labor would have an advantage in)
 
Last edited:

hazaar

Greenie
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
175
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
just curious...why is your BOS name Nick Minchin? what do you see in the south australian senator and minister for finance?
 

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,719
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
Exphate said:
Want to do me a favour and source your assumptions?
Newspoll. Geographic and demographic analysis of federal voting intention.
http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/...continue_results&question_id=2473&url_caller=

In the end, it’s the election campaign period that really matters.
As highlighted in the 2004 election year polling:
http://www.ozpolitics.info/election2004/newspoll-v-morgan-2004.gif


____

Labor's first job is to catch up on economics

New leader rewards his backers and foes
Labor's new-look front bench
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
110
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
hazaar said:
just curious...why is your BOS name Nick Minchin? what do you see in the south australian senator and minister for finance?
He's one of the most economically respectable members of the coalition and one of the few federalists left in parliament.
 

Rafy

Retired
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
10,719
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Uni Grad
2008
Kevin Rudd is wrong, I'm no market zealot
John Howard

IN the past two weeks I have listened carefully to the charges levelled against the Government by the new Labor Leader, Kevin Rudd. Unable to mount a coherent attack on our economic record, he has fallen back on the claim that we have made Australia a less fair society.
What is interesting is that, having promised a new style of Labor leadership, Kevin Rudd has adopted the same basic approach as every one of his predecessors since 1996. The same crude demonisation of the Government on grounds of fairness. The same hyperbolic overreach. The same absence of solid facts and coherent argument.

The Opposition Leader's rhetorical device of choice is the Straw Man. He conjures up a bogus image before proceeding to knock it down. [...]

[continued]
Rudd like other Labor failures: Howard
Number and number, or Labor's lost loves
 
Last edited:

Valeu

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
65
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Rudd has no option but to use exaggerated hyperbole to attack the Govt on grounds of economic fairness. There is little, except for some fixing up around the edges, that he can do to make the economy more 'fair, just or equitable'. Thus, he descends into hyperbole, rightfully criticising the state of the society/economy, but unable to do anyhting to change it.

Governments are held at the mercy of international finance and big capital - If Rudd even looked like taking concrete steps to a reformed, socially just economy (including any expansion of govt services it would entail), he would be stopped in his tracks. Not to mention the weight of the domestic print/TV media that would be turned against him.

It seems as though he's taking a similar line Blair has taken against the Tories, galvanising opposition to economic injustice yet solidifying the institutional base of said injustice. See when he says, 'I'm an economic conservative'. We're apparently all neo-liberals now.

Even Latham, who was economically orthodox, was labelled an 'envy merchant' of sorts when attempting to rectify educational funding, and blasted for his proposed extension of Medicare. (fiscally responsible or not, I think it was the mere principle of expanding govt provision of healthcare that made the media so hostile to Medicare Gold). The point, I think, is that Rudd is bound by (among other things) a deeply conservative political culture, which sees all thought independent of entrenched power as subversive. See, for example, the ubiquitious pandering to American alliance on both sides of politics (i.e. American b1tch status). Another reason, incidentally, why Latham was so hated by the elites.

It seems, in politics, the more independent in policy/philosophy a group or politician is, the more they get slandered. The Greens have been hammered by the Tory press for years now, often in acts of thinly veiled propaganda. It is much safer to be 'conservative' than independent (or 'kooky' as the PM would say.)

This has turned basically into a general rant on politics in Aus, of which Rudd finds himself a part. He will be better for the general population of Australia than Howard, but not by the degree that voters disenchanted with Howard might expect.

My 2c, from someone eager to cast their first vote next year.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top