tip off

It’s time in Qld, but maybe not for Newman

The campaign for next fortnight’s Queensland state election has well and truly lived up to its promise as one of the most fascinating in recent Australian history.

It has been made so not by the political upheavals, party splits and voter alienation that normally characterise memorable electoral contests, but by a single act of human folly.

But for the Liberal National Party’s decision to foist a prospective new premier upon parliament through a kamikaze attack on a broadly green-left inner-urban seat, the election’s only point of interest would be the size of the landslide awaiting to be inflicted on a tired and discredited Labor government.

The LNP’s strategy is not so much audacious as profoundly confused: it seemed at once so frightened of Anna Bligh’s post-floods poll spike that it reacted with what looked for all the world like a desperate gamble, and yet so confident that it founded this gamble upon a hubristic tilt at a seat with a Labor margin of more than 7%.

The fear was clearly unfounded — one needed only to look at the aftermath of the Victorian bushfires in 2009, when Labor under John Brumby shot to an ephemeral 60-40 lead in Newspoll, to see that Queensland’s electoral rhythms would soon reassert themselves, as indeed they had by the middle of last year. And the confidence would have been correspondingly well placed, had it not been for the time bomb the party activated for itself with the Newman-for-Ashgrove strategy.

So obvious was this folly that even psephologists could see it. In a prescient piece at the time, the plot was hatched a year ago, Peter Brent of Mumble spoke of a “dumb move by a traumatised party”, which offered the government a “tiny hope of survival” it would not have otherwise had. Reminded of the 2006 election, when a Labor government encumbered by the “Dr Death” catastrophe won in a landslide thanks to confusion over which of the two conservative leaders should be treated as the premier-designate, I warned on my blog of “yet another mid-campaign implosion” if “polling were to emerge showing Newman falling short”.

So it has come to pass over the past few days. First came ReachTel’s Ashgrove poll on Thursday — the seventh such poll it has been able to conduct since September thanks to its low-cost automated phone poll methodology — which showed Labor member Kate Jones in a statistical dead heat with Newman, with Jones in fact having a headline-grabbing lead on the published two-party preferred figure.

One could always have argued that it wouldn’t do to read too much into such a result: the variability of polling is such that individual polls should be treated cautiously at the best of times, and ReachTel in particular is a new outfit that has produced some eccentric figures in its polling of other electorates (albeit that these have consistently taken the form of disastrous numbers for Labor).

But the bigger point is that it was never going to take much to activate concerns about Newman’s capacity to win Ashgrove, and hence to place grave doubts about the LNP at the centre of a campaign that should have been all about the disposal of an unwanted old government.

Then came The Courier-Mail’s publication on Saturday of a large-sample poll conducted by Galaxy, which uses tried-and-tested phone surveying and has as good a track record as any pollster in the game. This produced a still worse set of figures for Newman: he and Jones were level on 45% of the primary vote, which after distribution of Greens preferences pointed to a Labor win by a margin of 1.5%.

The final fortnight of the campaign will thus be entirely about what might happen should the result play out as polling indicates, with the LNP winning the election but Newman losing Ashgrove. The LNP has responded with yet more strategic confusion: voters at large are being assured defeat in Ashgrove won’t happen, while voters in Ashgrove are being scared into line with talk of dire consequences (“no plan B”) if it does.

Labor will thus go into the final fortnight of the campaign with a stronger hand to play than it could ever have dared hope.

And yet for all that, Newman still looks a better bet to carry Ashgrove than Labor does to fulfill its part of the bargain by winning the actual election. The reason for this is the one factor in electoral politics that overrides all others: the “it’s time” factor.

I have just spent an improving couple of hours playing with a dataset of mainland state election figures going back to the start of the 1980s, which points to a fairly robust association between a government’s time in office and its two-party preferred vote. The upshot is that a government of Labor’s longevity in Queensland has little right to anticipate a two-party preferred vote north of 45%.

This is even without accounting for the fact that Labor returned to power in 1998 after the fairly brief interruption of Rob Borbidge’s Coalition government, which lasted only from February 1996 to June 1998 — such that Labor has been in power in the traditionally conservative state for all but 2½ out of the past 21 years.

With the LNP merger having largely resolved the issues that helped Labor defy gravity before now, the circumstances of the coming election are such that the proverbial drover’s dog could have led the LNP to a handsome parliamentary majority.

Certainly John-Paul Langbroek, shunted aside so Newman could direct the opposition from the parliamentary visitors’ gallery, would not have had any trouble in persuading the electorate that he offered the requisite safe pair of hands.

125
  • 1
    Edward James
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

    What are you on about William Bowe ? This Queensland State election is an IQ test for taxpayers in Queensland who have been paying attention to the national political stage. Labor nationally is continuing to consume itself. Bob carr has been sucked up to provide something of substance for the voting public. We the peoples are long over due to plough in the dead wood politicians who have for years promised us everything and delivered almost nothing apart from higher interest rates on money which Labor has borrowed in our names. Edward James

  • 2
    guytaur
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

    Katters entering the fray with real money is a game changer. All assumptions have been that the LNP has to win in the South East corner. With his disgraceful antigay advert. Katter may persuade some previously rusted on LNP voters to switch. Katter has wedged the LNP with it. Support homophobia and keep your base or condemn homophobia and lose your base.
    How big a swing remains to be seen. It shows however that yet again assumption about safe seats re made with real electoral peril.

  • 3
    Edward James
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    Ask Katters relative ?

  • 4
    Coaltopia
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    In the words of Radiohead: “When I go forwards you go backwards and somewhere we will meet”.

  • 5
    David Allen
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    I try not to do prophecy but it’s very, very interesting.

    Newman needs to provide some policy costings pretty swiftly I think. My wife and I will be posting our votes in 48 hours and, Campbrll, no costings - no votes!

  • 6
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

    ….has as good a track record as any pollster in the game.”

    Now that needs a bit of fleshing out William. How good are they? How accurate? Any numbers on which to base this testimonial or are they all just shockers.

    Any suggestion as to how these market surveys are allocating preferences?

    And lastly: Would you be up to placing a few wagers at all? Individual seats or overall results.

  • 7
    GeeWizz
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 3:51 pm | Permalink

    Newman needs to provide some policy costings pretty swiftly I think. My wife and I will be posting our votes in 48 hours and, Campbrll, no costings - no votes!”

    Oh please you were never going to vote LNP, I bet you’ve been a Labor supporter from the day you were born.

    We already know what Anna Bligh is offering Queenslanders because we’ve had a taster. 20% increase in rego’s weeks after the last state election, scrapping of the fuel subsidy at the same time for a double blow on motorists, Billions of dollars of debt and a health system in crisis.

    The problem with Blights election campaign that we don’t know who we will get as leader if we vote LNP is that you DO KNOW who you will get if you vote Labor and thats Anna Blight, which is good enough reason to vote for anyone else.

    Can’t wait to see Labor and it’s hacks ramp up the desperation as the landslide win to LNP draws closer.

  • 8
    guytaur
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 3:56 pm | Permalink

    @Geewizz

    Awwwww No Fair. How dare someone else use your tactics about a party behaviour changing a vote.

  • 9
    guytaur
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

    @Geewizz

    Are you for Newman or are you for Katter?

  • 10
    GeeWizz
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

    @Geewizz

    Are you for Newman or are you for Katter?”

    Like the majority of Queenslanders I am for “anyone but Blight”

    Katter will be hard pressed to win any seats outside of North Queensland where his base is, but I live in Townsville so I may just vote for him as he might have a chance to pick up a couple of seats here.

    What I do know… despite all the spin from the Labor supporters is that no matter if it’s Katter or the LNP picking up seats… in the famous words of one Redhead Footy presenter, Labors GORRNEE.

  • 11
    Coaltopia
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

    Ahh motorists, the reason Brisbane is in epic debt. The reason we have fail tunnels, air pollution, noise pollution, the ugly riverside expressway and hideous Herston overpasses, the billions wasted on fuel subsidies, failed flow control systems, overpriced and poor public transport… and of course, the reason my bus is always late.

  • 12
    GeeWizz
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

    Coaltopia and the solution is?

    Maybe Bligh and Gillard can announce a $50 Billion Dollar monorail system…. they seem to love spending our money

  • 13
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

    Troofie,

    What’s this “our money” business? You trying to tell us you pay tax?

  • 14
    guytaur
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

    @Geewizz

    You seem to not understand the article. Still maybe you gone Troppo up there in Townsville. It would explain the spelling.
    No one doubts that Labor is gone. What is amazing everyone is how Newman and company are doing their level best to lose the election. No Barry O Farrell style election campaign. Instead one that reminds me of Federal Labor and its 2010 campaign.

  • 15
    Kevin
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

    I WAS rusted on Labor until about one month after the last election, the betrayal of what I thought was Labor values has left me looking to vote Green ( can’t stand Can Do and all his bull, I lived in Brisbane under his reign….. Show pony!)

    Something not mentioned is that we have Optional Prefermtial Voting in QLD so just vote 1 will be a large factor in the result.

  • 16
    Coaltopia
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 5:07 pm | Permalink

    The legacy of 1950’s American city planning are hard to overcome. What’s known - e.g. by the principles of Jan Gehl - it that cities rejuvenate when you reduce private car transport. Brisbane has made good progress on improving cycling but it’s minuscule compared to the tunnel expense. Sunshine/Gold coasties are almost entirely car-dependant, unless I’m mistaken. Regional areas still require assistance as public transport is impractical, however the $2 billion the Feds give to foreign mining companies via the fuel tax credit is patent waste and could be used to improve our infrastructure.

    Queensland should never have subsidised fuel. The tunnels should’ve been cross-river rail. The airport already has a train, its frequency should’ve been increased. All major train routes to Ipswich, Robina and Caboolture should’ve had capacity increased. Large housing developments west of Brisbane like Springfield Lakes should’ve required rail investment/infrastructure upfront. T2 lanes should’ve been more widely used. The Go-Between bridge was unnecessary, though a much cheaper cycling/pedestrian bridge could’ve been built further west instead of the arguably unnecessary Kulripa bridge.

    I’m sure there’s other examples.

    All of these are “should ofs”, as now that Brisbane is in a Legacy Way of Debt to tunnels, it can’t afford a way out of its cartropolis.

  • 17
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

    Peter Ormonde, Galaxy has published election-eve opinion polls at 11 state and federal elections going back to 2004. Its mean absolute error (i.e. the average it has been off the mark in either direction) has been 1.3% for the Labor primary vote, 1.1% for the LNP, 1.3% for the Greens and 1.0% for the two-party preferred. At no election have any of these errors fallen outside the range of the 3% margin of error. Galaxy has shown a very slight tendency for its errors to lean in Labor’s favour, such that the mean error on 2PP has been 0.6% in Labor’s favour. If you don’t like their preference allocation method then you’re free to rate this as unknowable and go off the primary vote instead, but the evidence available provides no reason to suppose that a 2PP derived from the preference flows of the previous election will be any more wrong than the primary vote figures from which they are derived.

  • 18
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    William,

    I’m trying to find a link for the Galaxy report of its poll … doesn’t seem to be available via its website. Can you slip me a link.

    No wager then?

  • 19
    Lord Barry Bonkton
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 7:50 pm | Permalink

    Kevin , after listening to truffie/Geewiz/S.b , I am with you Greens 1 ONLY. Our GBR is too important and after reading about China capping coal imports at Renew Economy , by 2015 and investing more in Solar and Wind. The two old parties are not looking far enough into the future and will Australia without other Industries and tourism will be dead after all the dredging and coal ships cruising through the GBR , at 1 every hour. It is a disaster waiting to happen. Fracking will long term stuff our water supply and farming land and we will be in deep shite. Clive and Gina will just buy another island to live on .

  • 20
    guytaur
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

    Given policies of the major parties the whole Coal Seam Gas issue is going to develop interesting voter trends.
    This is a vote change issue. Coal Seam Gas as an issue is this decades Franklin Dam.

  • 21
    mrsynik
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 9:01 pm | Permalink

    should ofs

    Wouldn’t it be more correct to say “Should have’s” rather than “Should of’s” - or is the the banana-bender dialect at work again where the locals pronounce Nine & Fire as if they were pronouncing it in German?

  • 22
    Lord Barry Bonkton
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 9:25 pm | Permalink

    Are the gremlins back ? keep getting 500 server error ?

  • 23
    GeeWizz
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 9:33 pm | Permalink

    And lastly: Would you be up to placing a few wagers at all? Individual seats or overall results.”

    Centrebets paying out $8.50 for a Labor win, so why don’t you put up or shut up?

  • 24
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

    Troofie,

    I only like to bet against people who make predictions. I don’t bet for the money. I bet for the humiliation of fools. Interested?

  • 25
    Suzanne Blake
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 9:55 pm | Permalink

    There will be twists and turns in Queensland and indeed Ashgrove before Saturday week.

  • 26
    Coaltopia
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 10:02 pm | Permalink

    That’s pure “dialecto” Mr Synik.

  • 27
    GeeWizz
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 10:04 pm | Permalink

    There will be twists and turns in Queensland and indeed Ashgrove before Saturday week.”

    Suzanne I am predicting a wipeout for Labor WORSE than NSW.

    QLD’ers don’t like getting beaten by the southern welshman

  • 28
    botswana bob
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 12:36 am | Permalink

    As a resident of Ashgrove, depicted as a “broadly green-left inner-urban seat” may I offer a few observations.
    First Greens do considerably better in the adjacent seat occupied by Deputy Premier Andrew Fraser than in Ashgrove and have an outside chance to win that seat.

    Second the ALP has run a crafty campaign in Ashgrove. The sitting ALP member is a local girl. Her campaign signs/leaflets do not mention ALP ties. She quit the ministry and devoted full time to campaigning. As leader, Newman has other demands on his time. Many voters — us included — have received phone calls from people who claim to be locals supporting the ALP member. These callers have been revealed to be union officers reading from a prepared script. And in a highly provincial electorate much is made of the fact than Newman doesn’t live here.

    Third the polls have been telephone polls and may under report the ALP/Greens support. Phone polls don’t pick up the young demographic who have mobiles not landlines. So the ALP/Greens support may be higher than reported.

    Should the Greens preference the ALPs Kate Jones its likely Newman is as finito as Benito.

    Overall the LNP — Pineapple Party — will get in. How long this uneasy marriage of Brisbane Liberals and rural Nationals last is another matter. Coal gas will be the first stress test-the Liberal element are all for it, the rural peasants hate it.

  • 29
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 1:15 am | Permalink

    BB, the issue with landlines and the young vote is a bit more subtle than that. Phone pollsters target a quota of each age group, and keep phoning until they reach their quotas. It’s invariably the youngest age cohort which is harder to get hold of, so most of the last day of polling will be spent asking anyone who answers the phone if there is “anyone aged 18 to 24 in the household available”. The responses for each age cohort are then weighted to iron out any discrepancies between the numbers polled and their share of the population. So while there are issues with the kind of voter who doesn’t have a landline being excluded from the survey, the issue is more complex than a simple under-representation of young people.

  • 30
    John Kotsopoulos
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 1:55 am | Permalink

    geewiz who said you had a right to a non means tested Govt subsidy on petrol? Clearly you believe in magic pudding economics with lower taxes and charges but better roads and services . Get real.

  • 31
    Edward James
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 3:01 am | Permalink

    LORD BARRY BONKTON
    Posted Monday, 12 March 2012 at 9:25 pm | Permalink
    Are the gremlins back ? keep getting 500 server error ?
    Me too, on a Mac. around six PM Sunday night.
    I just had to walk away{;-( Edward James

  • 32
    David Allen
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 7:18 am | Permalink

    GW
    “Oh please you were never going to vote LNP, I bet you’ve been a Labor supporter from the day you were born”

    You know nothing about me. I’ve voted Tory (UK, NZ & Oz) in 3 countries and for Joh B.P.

    20% increase in rego’s weeks after the last state election”

    My rego over the last 6 years, same vehicle inc. 3rd Party with on time payment discount.

    2007 - $389.00
    2008 - $371.60
    2009 - $408.30
    2010 - $466.80
    2011 - $436.35
    2012 - $440.80

    I concede it had a blip in 2010 but, in truth, it has risen 13% over the 6 years. Not even CPI.

    Bl**dy facts, eh?

  • 33
    Suzanne Blake
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 7:34 am | Permalink

    @ botswana bob

    Same in NSW in 2010, Labor either removed ALP logo, or made it so small, you needed to be under 25 to see it.

    The banners said

    David Mehan working for The Entrance

    He was a new candidate, the previous ALP one resigned / retired

  • 34
    Suzanne Blake
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 7:42 am | Permalink

    @ GeeWizz

    The fact that Bligh injected dishonest Gillard into the campaign launch, may indeed be a twist and turn, that will help the other side.

  • 35
    David Allen
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    mrsynik

    I’ve been holding my tongue…

    Should of” should be “Should have”
    “Could of” should be “Could have”
    “Would of” should be “Would have”

    The Concise Oxford says
    USAGE (of ‘have’)
    Be careful not to write the word of when you mean have or ‘ve: I could’ve told you that not I could of told you that. The mistake arises from the fact that the pronunciation of have in unstressed contexts is the same as that of of, and the two words are confused when writing them down.

    A greater familiarity with books would tend to negate the propensity to commit these errors

  • 36
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:08 am | Permalink

    I agree with Guytaur

    The leader of a new government normally has personal authority within their party from winning the election, which they can use to discipline their party. If Newman doesn’t win Ashgrove not only will there be a leadership contest within the LNP between former Liberals and former Nationals, the new leader won’t have much personal authority. This may result in indisciplined government and the risk of another brief single term.

  • 37
    Karen
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    I cannot understand why the Queenslanders don’t vote for the Greens who will be the only party that will stop their State from turning into one big unregulated, poisoned Gasland. What is happening in Queensland is absolutely atrocious - even Clive Palmer can’t bear CSG, now that’s saying something for a big miner.

  • 38
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:29 am | Permalink

    Karen,

    I suspect that the reason Clive Palmer is hostile to CSG is that he’s not making a quid out of it - yet. Same as the parrot.

    Ticks have no values beyond their next feed.

  • 39
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    @Karen.

    When it comes to voting people stay with what they know. This means it can take decades for a new party to build a voter base. The Greens are still in the process of doing so.
    My mention of the Franklin River, No Dams campaign is the only pt comparison. This is why the Green ote is particularly strong in Tasmania. Queensland and any other state suffering Coal Seam Gas is going to suffer such division as the elites push against the National and peoples interest in their rush to proit. The danger to the Great Barrier Reef will draw in an international “celebrity” to mobilize world opinion as David Bellamy did for the Franklin Campaign.
    This will make Labor far more willing to act at the Federal level.
    Even in this election campaign there will be an increase.
    Voters see a passionate Alan Jones of radio fame 100% on the side of Greens. That alone is a vote changer.
    So yes the Green vote will increase. It will just be incremental though.
    This might change if a Coal Seam Zgas project commences in the Ashgrove electorate.

  • 40
    GeeWizz
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    geewiz who said you had a right to a non means tested Govt subsidy on petrol? Clearly you believe in magic pudding economics with lower taxes and charges but better roads and services . Get real.”

    John,

    The fuel subsidy in QLD is because QLD is a very uncentralised state population wise, at least compared to other states. We have broad populations centres scattered all the way up the coast between Cairns all the way down to the Gold Coast and a large population centre out west in Mt Isa.

    But to your question, the government doesn’t actually give QLD’ers anything all they are doing is reducing the tax burden by our federal government whom has a duel levy of around 40 cents a litre.

    With regards to the magic pudding economy, there is an incredible amount of waste in governments that needs to go. Better roads and services sounds like a good idea but unfortunately it’s all overwhelmed by huge waste, feel good pet projects no one cares about and unionised government departments taking the taxpayer for a ride.

    If I had my way I’d sack the entire public service and offer all the jobs back only on a pay to performance basis.

  • 41
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    Guytaur,

    The Greens also face a bit of an obstacle in Queensland with the optional preferential system … tends to emphasise the tweedle dums and tweedle dees I suspect. Having to actually mark the Greens box on a ballot paper - even down the list - presents them as a legitimate player in the process. A stupid undemocratic system that favours the old order. Katter will have the same problem. The hat and the controversy helps.

  • 42
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    Wizz/Troofie

    They tax duelling in Queensland!!! This is an outrageous impost on evolution.

  • 43
    Suzanne Blake
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    @ Geewizz

    If I had my way I’d sack the entire public service and offer all the jobs back only on a pay to performance basis”

    You are a genius. Same for school teachers as well. They academically improve their students or they look for another career, special exemption for special needs teachers. Kids that want to much up at School, get shifted to a special needs class or school. or program.

    Get rid of duplication in state / federal governments, and run like a lean, efficient productive operation. Creat new jobs in ‘new economy’ , intense food production, increasing arable lands etc.

  • 44
    GeeWizz
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    My rego over the last 6 years, same vehicle inc. 3rd Party with on time payment discount.

    2007 - $389.00
    2008 - $371.60
    2009 - $408.30
    2010 - $466.80
    2011 - $436.35
    2012 - $440.80”

    Utter utter rubbish, proven to be completely rubbish for anyone who bothers to check please go to the QLD Transport website.

    A 4 cylinder, personal use, car rego with the cheapest CTP provider available is currently $638.90 a Year. Bit far off this guys numbers. Rego has risen… without fail, year on year.

    So what are we to assume you are driving exactly mate, a steam powered unicycle?

  • 45
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    @Peter

    Yes. Katter is following the “One Nation” fear and loathing strategy. He has just picked gays instead of asians as the bogeyman.

    Looking at that One Nation success is I think a reason for a slim chance of Labor retaining government. Katter knows from bitter personal experience of being in the tent and outside it with a hung parliament. if this slim chance does happen he knows he would be more influential with Labor than with LNP. We know Katter can come to the centre when it is interest to do so.

    That slim chance gets greater as the Newman campaign continues its trainwreck.

  • 46
    GeeWizz
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    Guytaur,

    you are living in lala land if you think it’s going to be a hung parliament. Labor will have enough members to fill a telephone booth after this election. I have to give you points though for your optimism, I guess the septic tank is always half full down there at Labor HQ.

  • 47
    guytaur
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    @Geewizz

    Remember polls are a snapshot of the past. Numbers in Parliament change as seats do. LNP has paid lip service to FNQ.
    Katter is going to make them pay the price. That and uncertainty who will win Ashgrove is slowing the juggernaut.
    Labor will not win. What might happen though is the slim chance outcome. Note I said slim. I did not say will.
    We now know the LNP has lost some lustre and seats maybe includung Ashgrove due to the campaign trainwreck.
    Again for your eduction. LNP. Has what NSW Coalition did not. Leader not in Parliament. Uncertainty over if that leader will be in Parliament. (Labor attaking on this aspect). A new party wedging the voting base.

  • 48
    David Allen
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    Peter,

    The Greens also face a bit of an obstacle in Queensland with the optional preferential system … tends to emphasise the tweedle dums and tweedle dees I suspect. Having to actually mark the Greens box on a ballot paper - even down the list - presents them as a legitimate player in the process. A stupid undemocratic system that favours the old order.”

    Unusually, I think you’re completely wrong on this.

    Under the optional system, I can, and will, vote 1 - Greens. My preferences will not flow.

    Under the compulsory system, even if I choose every minor party and independent first my preference, almost certainly, will aggregate to one of the majors. Of course, this, they will say, adds to their ‘mandate’.

  • 49
    David Allen
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    GeeWizz,

    So what are we to assume you are driving exactly mate, a steam powered unicycle?”

    If you must assume, try assuming that I benefit from a pensioner discount. Ever heard of Ockham’s Razor?

    The figures quoted are straight from my accounts and it’s a 97 ford Laser 4 cylinder.

    You should be the lasdt person to accuse anyone of talking rubbish, with possibly a frew exceptions

  • 50
    Peter Ormonde
    Posted Tuesday, 13 March 2012 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    David,

    You’re right of course - there will be sensible informed people who will choose to do a single greens vote. And I hope they do very well.

    It’s just that for those who regard voting as an unwarranted intrusion by guvvermint - who vote against rather than vote for - who use their votes to show how “unhappy” they are - the optional preference system makes it a bit harder to get onto the main table for smaller parties over a decade or so of ballots I suspect.

    When people - thinking people - are required to consider their preferences they tend to pay some attention to what else is on offer.

    Only a hunch, mind you. None of these political scientists actually study such fine details of our voting system. Too interested in who wins to look at such trivia. A science of the bleeding obvious.

Womens Agenda

loading...

Smart Company

loading...

StartupSmart

loading...

Property Observer

loading...