|
|
Post by ntyuk1707 on Oct 3, 2023 23:05:31 GMT
Essential poll of Victoria, NSW and QLD (27 Sept.-1 Oct.)
NO 49%
YES 41
DK 8%
With don't knows removed:
NO 53%
YES 47%
No leads +17% in QLD, +8% in NSW, +2% in VI.
|
|
|
|
Post by ntyuk1707 on Oct 5, 2023 10:38:16 GMT
YouGov (25-29 Sept)
NO 53%
YES 38%
DK 9%
Without undecideds:
NO 58%
YES 42%
|
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Oct 6, 2023 1:44:29 GMT
But it won't feel really perfect unless the establishment loses in all six states.
|
|
|
|
Post by ibfc on Oct 6, 2023 9:21:21 GMT
I doubt they’ll lose Victoria.
|
|
|
|
Post by ntyuk1707 on Oct 6, 2023 9:32:34 GMT
I doubt they’ll lose Victoria. The polling average in Australia is a 58% No vote, so that should yield a No win across every state. Added to that, I'd be hopeful for Northern Territory and ACT to return No votes. |
|
|
|
Post by ntyuk1707 on Oct 6, 2023 9:50:07 GMT
Roy Morgan 25 September-1 October (changes with 18-24 September):
NO 46% (+2)
YES 37% (-2)
DK 17% (=)
With undecideds removed:
NO 56% (+3)
YES 44% (-3)
|
|
|
|
Post by ntyuk1707 on Oct 6, 2023 9:52:35 GMT
Jacinta Price has made quite the name for herself over the course of the referendum campaign. She is an exceptional orator and campaigner. It has been suggested she may come to lead the Nationals in future, or even the Coalition to become a future PM of Australia. jamie would you be able to provide any insight? |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,380 
|
Post by stb12 on Oct 6, 2023 10:09:24 GMT
Jacinta Price has made quite the name for herself over the course of the referendum campaign. She is an exceptional orator and campaigner. It has been suggested she may come to lead the Nationals in future, or even the Coalition to become a future PM of Australia. jamie would you be able to provide any insight? The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader doesn’t it? |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Oct 6, 2023 10:37:10 GMT
Jacinta Price has made quite the name for herself over the course of the referendum campaign. She is an exceptional orator and campaigner. It has been suggested she may come to lead the Nationals in future, or even the Coalition to become a future PM of Australia. jamie would you be able to provide any insight? The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader doesn’t it? The ghost of Arthur Fadden would like a word. That said there's a joint party in the Northern Territory with MPs traditionally sitting with the Liberals and Senators with the Nationals so if Price could get a lower house seat it might be easier for her than most National Senators. However the CLP is not that strong in federal elections so she might have to hop to a state. |
|
|
|
Post by ntyuk1707 on Oct 6, 2023 10:54:11 GMT
The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader doesn’t it? The ghost of Arthur Fadden would like a word. That said there's a joint party in the Northern Territory with MPs traditionally sitting with the Liberals and Senators with the Nationals so if Price could get a lower house seat it might be easier for her than most National Senators. However the CLP is not that strong in federal elections so she might have to hop to a state. The 2024 NT election might give some indication as to how the vote may be going in Lingiari. The Country Liberal candidate at the 2022 federal election lost out to Labour in the division by less than 1,000 votes on second preferences, so its an extremely marginal seat. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Oct 6, 2023 11:06:48 GMT
The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader [not the National Party leader] doesn’t it? That’s like saying The Prime Minister always has to be the Conservative [not Labour] Party leader doesn’t it? or The Union candidate for Chancellor always has to be the CDU leader [not the CSU leader] doesn’t it? or The President of the USSR always has to be the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union [not Andrei Gromyko] doesn’t it? or The largest party in the Republic of Ireland always has to be Fianna Fail (not Fine Gael or Sinn Fein] doesn’t it? or (et cetera, ad nauseam, e pluribus unum, kaj tiel plu) |
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,380
|
Post by stb12 on Oct 6, 2023 11:10:51 GMT
The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader [not the National Party leader] doesn’t it? That’s like saying The Prime Minister always has to be the Conservative [not Labour] Party leader doesn’t it? or The Union candidate for Chancellor always has to be the CDU leader [not the CSU leader] doesn’t it? or The President of the USSR always has to be the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union [not Andrei Gromyko] doesn’t it? or The largest party in the Republic of Ireland always has to be Fianna Fail (not Fine Gael or Sinn Fein] doesn’t it? or (et cetera, ad nauseam, e pluribus unum, kaj tiel plu) Well not really, I’m referring to the particular arrangement in Australia which has been going on for decades |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Oct 6, 2023 11:20:52 GMT
The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader doesn’t it? The ghost of Arthur Fadden would like a word. That said there's a joint party in the Northern Territory with MPs traditionally sitting with the Liberals and Senators with the Nationals so if Price could get a lower house seat it might be easier for her than most National Senators. However the CLP is not that strong in federal elections so she might have to hop to a state. I looked up Arthur Fadden on Wikipedia, and I discovered something I wasn’t aware of before (or, at least, I might have forgotten): the United Australia Party was formed in 1931 as the Australian sort-of equivalent of the National government in the UK: a combination of the National[ist] Party and a small group of people who defected from the Labor Party, supporting conservative financial policies in the wake of the Great Depression. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Oct 6, 2023 12:09:04 GMT
The 2024 NT election might give some indication as to how the vote may be going in Lingiari. The Country Liberal candidate at the 2022 federal election lost out to Labour in the division by less than 1,000 votes on second preferences, so its an extremely marginal seat. That was the first House election in 38 years without Warren Snowdon on the ballot paper. He had a massive personal vote (and saw off Price in his last election in 2019) and his retirement was always going to open things up. However Marion Scrymgour is now established and may be hard to dislodge now she's incumbent. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Oct 6, 2023 12:12:49 GMT
The ghost of Arthur Fadden would like a word. That said there's a joint party in the Northern Territory with MPs traditionally sitting with the Liberals and Senators with the Nationals so if Price could get a lower house seat it might be easier for her than most National Senators. However the CLP is not that strong in federal elections so she might have to hop to a state. I looked up Arthur Fadden on Wikipedia, and I discovered something I wasn’t aware of before (or, at least, I might have forgotten): the United Australia Party was formed in 1931 as the Australian sort-of equivalent of the National government in the UK: a combination of the National[ist] Party and a small group of people who defected from the Labor Party, supporting conservative financial policies in the wake of the Great Depression. It also included Billy Hughes's Australian Party - he had been expelled from the Nationalists in 1929 for voting against on the bill that brought down the Bruce government and the following year founded a new party with an unimaginative name and three other ex Nationalist independents. The Australian Party never really took off and was humiliated in the 1930 New South Wales election, with members soon dropping out. Clearly Hughes couldn't wait for another expulsion any time soon so took it into the new UAP, even getting to lead it a decade later and then subsequently got expelled from another party. Billy Hughes, member of six parties, leader of five, co-founder of four and expelled from three. |
|
|
|
Post by willpower3 on Oct 6, 2023 12:24:07 GMT
The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader doesn’t it? The ghost of Arthur Fadden would like a word. That said there's a joint party in the Northern Territory with MPs traditionally sitting with the Liberals and Senators with the Nationals so if Price could get a lower house seat it might be easier for her than most National Senators. However the CLP is not that strong in federal elections so she might have to hop to a state. There was also the infamous plan of "Joh for Canberra" in 1987 which was going to have the right-wing reactionary Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen (Nationals) as Prime Minister-designate and, IIRC, Andrew Peacock (Liberals) as Deputy. A somewhat bizarre proposal of a partnership as Peacock came from the small-l liberal wing of the Liberal Party. Peacock was probably interested in this due to his animosity towards then-Liberal leader (and future Prime Minister) John Howard. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Oct 6, 2023 12:47:47 GMT
Joh for Canberra was a chaotic mess that saw both the Coalition and the National Party implode, with the Queensland Nats pulling out of first the Coalition party room and then briefly even the National party room, the Coalition dissolved, the breakaway Northern Territory Nationals jumping in on the action on Joh's side, various Liberals showing an interest, Joh not even being in the country when the election was called and more.
Even without all that the election itself was also a mess, being a double dissolution called over a bill that proved ultimately proved unworkable even though Labor had the numbers to pass it in a joint sitting. And it denied the High Court a chance to rule on a stand-off in Tasmania where the state parliament refused to appoint Labor's nominee for a replacement Senator and Labor refused to nominate an alternative candidate. A ruling would have determined what "shall choose" actually means.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 6, 2023 13:52:09 GMT
The coalition leader always has to be the Liberal leader [not the National Party leader] doesn’t it? That’s like saying The Prime Minister always has to be the Conservative [not Labour] Party leader doesn’t it? or The Union candidate for Chancellor always has to be the CDU leader [not the CSU leader] doesn’t it? or The President of the USSR always has to be the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union [not Andrei Gromyko] doesn’t it? or The largest party in the Republic of Ireland always has to be Fianna Fail (not Fine Gael or Sinn Fein] doesn’t it? or (et cetera, ad nauseam, e pluribus unum, kaj tiel plu) The Union once managed to have a Kanzlerkandidat who wasn't a member of either the CDU or CSU. And he won the election. (Ludwig Erhard) |
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,839
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Oct 6, 2023 15:01:09 GMT
There have been several problematic reMarks on the AbOrigines and colonization here: Firstly the asSertion, that people either are equal or will become (with "progress"/"reforms"/...) equal by socialEngineering. What has noThing to do with the reality of different genomes, which explain a lot (albeit not everyThing); but which is inevitable, of course, as soon as one believes in the democratic dogma of universal equality (1 man = 1 vote). Secondly, that colonization would have helped/harmed so much. Yet, P.CHAUNU tried to quantify the worth You - we Austrians were generally uninvolved, even economical victims, i have noThing to defend here - pressed out of the colonies and came to 1% of global worth. What was in the long run not without imPortance for the acCumulation of capital, yet meets not those phantastic numbers many have. And this misBelief relies on a common&conservative view of ecoNomy - that of the PhysioCrats: Who sits on and invests in the gold/silver/iron/..., would have a strong ecoNomy. While this has basically been true for archaic societies, it misses, that Europe's economical surge was based on technological exPlosions (especially in the XIth & XIXth). In short: Not on the just exploiting investor (let alone the lazy hoarder), instead on the ambitious engineer.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,054
|
Post by jamie on Oct 6, 2023 17:38:53 GMT
Jacinta Price has made quite the name for herself over the course of the referendum campaign. She is an exceptional orator and campaigner. It has been suggested she may come to lead the Nationals in future, or even the Coalition to become a future PM of Australia. jamie would you be able to provide any insight? She’s an interesting character. Her mother is a former Country Liberal state MP who lost her seat in 2016 (with an abysmal result even by the standard of that year) and Price herself had links to the conservative establishment before being elected. Shes clearly done well out of being an indigenous woman stridently opposed to a referendum on indigenous issues. However, she has 2 main issues. Firstly, she is defined by her views on indigenous policy and it’s unclear she would be as notable if discussion shifts to other issues. Given she represents a very unique constituency, she may find herself on shakier ground when trying to appeal to Nationals and right wing voters more generally across the whole nation. Secondly, she has displayed a fairly ideologically rigid approach to politics. She was clearly opposed to the Voice before the Coalition officially opposed it, and has more recently got in trouble for her comments on colonisation and being unable to back Dutton’s proposed referendum on constitutional recognition. In sum, this referendum campaign is her high point in conservative politics, and it’s unclear how much her star would fade in more ‘normal’ times. |
|
