So Labor picked up half a million votes in the first half of May and one hundred and forty thousand votes in the second half of May and they’ve got no hope, the nation’s not listening, they’ll have to put Rudd in, to ‘save the furniture’, they have no alternative, it’s over.
This was the burden of Dennis Shanahan on the Tony Delroy show last night though he must have known the figures in which Gillard was again Preferred Prime Minister. The head is off, and the chook keeps running around the yard. Print the legend. Print the legend. Labor is bound to lose. Lose big. Flap, flap. Lose big.
The real figure in fact is Labor on 49. The margin of error is 3 and Rupert is the customer and the truth must be minimised. 50 probably when the Katter preferences are put in. 51 when you add in the unrung mobile phones and the pensioners who got their money yesterday.
And the simple fact is that Abbott blew it last week by his persecution of Craig. The true schoolyard bully so long suspected by the female vote was at last made vivid, red in tooth and claw with fist raised, snarling. And the money for the schoolkids, the eight hundred or sixteen hundred, is yet to arrive in the mail.
And we must have Rudd, we must have Rudd, poor Denis said. To save the furniture. Labor is bound to lose. Rupert said so, and he’s very angry. And Rupert is always right.
How pathetic they all are.
Labor has picked up six hundred and forty thousand votes in a month and there are fifteen months to go and Labor is doomed, they reckon, Labor is doomed, gone for all money, cactus. What bought brains they all are. Rebekah, their Joan of Arc, is off to gaol and it is they who are trying to save the furniture, trying to save their jobs lest Rupert in his final howling holocaust of blood bring them down into perdition with him. Blair last night was telling Leveson winningly of the infinitude of their corruption and the wickedness of their purpose and it’s Labor not they who are in trouble. It’s what Freud called transference, the willingness to impute to one’s enemy the vileness one senses in oneself and is in denial of.
You will note I predicted this, and I alone, yesterday, and began my series The Innocence Of Craig Thomson seventeen days ago. The hooker will go on 9 tonight with a growling blurred voice and a pixillated face and a fistful of dollars and a pack of lies and a crucial false detail and it will be all, all n vain. The game is up, and as of tomorrow, or the next day, or next month, the Liberal Party is over. Trying to save the furniture and looking more and more enmired, like Murdoch.
Prove that I lie.
Name:
“Prove that I lie.”
Done.
Essential Media- Labor 43 Coalition 57, up from 44-56 last week. How many votes gained does that represent for the Coalition in one week?
Can I use your ‘logic’ to extrapolate that result across the weeks remaining until the election, or does that ‘logic’ only work one direction?
More importantly, Essential has no affiliation with News Ltd, so you cannot claim the sinister hand of Murdoch is affecting the results.
So please explain this result Mr Ellis. Explain why it does not match your assertion that Labor is going to romp home and the Liberals are facing doom.
PS. I wouldn’t read much into your Thomson prediction. You were also alone in predicting a NSW Labor vitory last year, and we all know how that turned out.
“It’s what Freud called transference, the willingness to impute to one’s enemy the vileness one senses in oneself and is in denial of.”
You would be wise to take your own advice here. Because I sense great denial in you.
I predicted Labor would lose big in NSW, don’t tell lies about me. Five months before I wrote about how they could win if they did what I said and they didn’t.
I have been right within three seats about thirty-two elections and dead wrong about twelve.
These include Bracks’s surprise win in 1999 and Abbott’s dumbfounding leadership victory in 200
Prove that I lie.
Fuck you.
‘Fuck you’?
How charming.
And no Bob, 5 months before the election you said you thought they *would* win (not could).
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/42654.html
“And it won’t happen anyway. I alone in all of Australia think Labor will hold government, in a perhaps hung parliament, in New South Wales on March 24.”
This reasoning was based on a number of outside factors, many of which were still in play on election day. It wasn’t contingent on the ALP following your advice.
And yes, you changed your prediction to a Labor loss closer to the election (even then you vastly underestimated the scale of the loss).
But the point is, months earlier, when every man and his dog could see the strife Labor were in, you prided yourself in being the one person to go the other way. And you did so based off a bunch of cherrypicked factors that supported your argument, and ignoring the greater weight of factors against your view.
And so it goes again now with the Thomson fiasco. And I can’t see the result being much different.
PS. Care to address the issues I raised regarding the Essential poll figures?
The Essential Poll figures were last week, before Abbott hounded Craig to the edge of suicide.
And lost sixty-two percent of the women, forever.
“The Essential Poll figures were last week, before Abbott hounded Craig to the edge of suicide.”
Crap. The poll was taken between Wednesday 23rd and Sunday 27th.
Are you seriously tellng me that the pressure from Tony Abbot and the Opposition *only* came after those dates?
If you are saying that, then I will call it a lie.
Thomson has been under pressure for months. It’s ridiculous to claim that the polls have turned on this issue suddenly. You have no proof.
Meanwhile two points remain unadressed.
1. Can we extrapolate any Liberal gain in the polls in the same fashion you extrapolate any Labor gains in the polls?
2. Do you (generally speaking) view the Essential polls to be accurate, as opposed to the supposedly Murdoch influenced Newspoll?
(In my experience Newspoll is fairly accurate in its election predictions which would speak to it’s integrity in my view, but that’s just me)
I am told the Essential Polls are not random, and therefore not accurate.
What is your information?
Okay, so Newspoll is apparently tainted by the evil Murdoch, and you don’t like Essential.
Which poll *do* you trust?
Are they random, or not?
25 March 2011.
Anyway, my prediction, Keneally will get 43 per cent and narrowly lose. Unless…
Labor 34 seats. One Green, Marrickville. Four or five Independents
And do they deserve to lose? No, no, no, old friend.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/45610.html
No, you will find I said on the night before the loss would be big.
What about the Chantelois election I got right within one seat, the election I alone said Baillieu would win, the bracks election I alone on the night said Bracks would scrape home in 1999 after a by-election, and the twenty-nine others, including Tony Abbott’s winning margin when everyone thought Hockey a shoo-in?
Do they not count?
Why do they not count?
I know Bob. I know. Of course you knew the result. Everyone knew the result 12 months out. I know you were just having some fun (‘hyperbowl’ is everywhere these days, not least in your posts). That’s okay. Beats the self-righteous junk we get elsewhere.
No, if they’d cancelled the privatisation they might have survived. And if they’d taken up my free-dentists-for-a- month-if-you’re-over- 78 plan. And if Firth’s bloke hadn’t been caught buying drugs.
One swallow does not a summer make.
“The Coalition’s primary vote was virtually unchanged during the past hectic weeks of federal politics, going from 45 per cent to 46 per cent”
All those bribes paid out by Gillard and the Coalitions primary vote rises one point?
Labor is finished.
On the contrary.
This is a Murdoch poll, understated. And it’s on — maybe — 49.
Let’s wait for the Nielsen.
Next Monday.
Virtually unchanged? From a seventy majority to a thirty majority?
Unchanged?
Are you mad?
Two thousand years.
I feel like Bolt here but its probably a false dawn, given that the essential media poll says ALP support weakened. So its probably still at 45:55.
I am with the Murdoch conspiracy that he wants Gillard to stay as she is the coalition’s best weapon.
Ironic that the leaders of each of the parties are holding their vote back. Who blinks first may win?
Which seats will ALP win to win the election? Not Denison, not Lyne, not New England?, not Dobell. So that looks like minimum 2-4 LNP gains already.
I am convinced Rudd + Shorten would be best, or Shorten on his own ticket may be enough if he runs with some policy changes.
I know Rudd and I know Shorten, and they barely pause to spit at each other.
One more reason to like Rudd…..
What are the big issues of principle between Rudd and Shorten? Name eight. Or, unlike decent people in the real world, are they just unable to out aside their personal spites?
Anyway, Bob, I may not post again before trudging off into the outer darkness; I have some weeping wailing and teeth gnashing to practice. But I’ve enjoyed this blog and have a present for you (along with my curse for your bad manners which I by no means rescind):
An eccentric old scribbler called Ellis,
Was eloquent, loyal and jealous.
He suspected Shakespeare
Was Edward De Vere,
As he frequently found cause to tell us.
The mistake sokme make with poll results is not looking closely enough at the proffered questions.
Essential media has a clientele and it is not a median representation – it is an exclusive somewhat grouping with narrower interests. Because it is a poll taken from a narrow minded pool is has little overall utility.
NewsPoll does seem to me and some others to have become very twisted up in NewsCraps lunge for a decent rupe-haven.
The Rudd numbers game run last week and over the weekend is about mis-stepping the Papist.
Combet would be far more problematic to His Sordid Madness than the red moon face.
Another Ellis SaladPoll (TM), another step away from reality.
Give eight examples of when I was wrong in the past.
Or be banned for life.
Take your time.
There are four in your comment below. I will nominate the remaining four following your next.
I refer to the past.
Please hurry.
I don’t think I like you.
Bob who do you predict will lead Labor in opposition against Abbott and Co?
It will not arise. Abbott has lost the affection of the people and he will not get it back. Labor under Gillard or another would beat him or Scott Morrison in October next year. They would be harder put beating Turnbull.
Well last night Chris Uhlmann presented news that was reported in the media in February, that is that Lawler was interfering in HSU.
Why bicker over single polls when you can use the average of all of them
Prove it lies!
Sorry, the link didn’t post
Fuck off.
Blue or black, you are a liar.
Bob,
Three words you are famous for and you stuff up the first one. Where’s the proof!
Here is the link to the poll average.
http://www.poliquant.com/australia/
A poll average is the best way to discount the bias of any single poll.
How does the poll average lie?
You know the test, prove it!
An average of two polls, with (I gather) different methodology…..lets not get carried away.
I think it is pretty clear that the Liberal’s are afraid their support is soft, that is why they are so very keen to have an early election, isn’t it?
Two polls are better than one!
It is the best possible combined sample given the circumstances.
Yeah…nobody should bet their house is all. Labile time.
The Essential polls show that the electorate is grumpy.
The coalition supporters think “we’ll all be rooned” because they have been told so so often by the opposition and the tame lazy media.
They don’t like the government because they don’t like the government, it seems.
And the economy can’t be good partly because the Labor rhetoric has been to say “people are doing it tough” and apparently the electorate take them at their word, despite all the objective evidence to the contrary!
That is, when they accept the media/opposition mantra, they are believed, but not otherwise.
Perhaps a change of rhetoric is needed, but subtly please – abrupt about-faces are not credible.