It was wrong of Mark Kenny, whom I had thought better of, to say in the smh this morning that ‘the odds and raw numbers’ are against Rudd and ‘the election will be hard-fought, and the result inevitably close.’
For Rudd is only one seat away from victory, and he already has it, in Chinese-heavy, Mandarin-speaking Bennelong, now contested by a Chinese-Australian hero.
Rudd has seventy-one seats plus Dobell, which Thomson or Labor on our polling will win by twenty percent. He has also, effectively, Melbourne, which Bandt will retain, or Labor at worst regain. He has Denison which Wilkie or Labor (after Broadband) will get. And he has Bob Katter, his greatest friend in politics. That is seventy-five. And he has Bennelong.
It is likely he will pick up three seats, furthermore, in Queensland; one in Western Australia; one in South Australia; and one more, Macquarie, in New South Wales; and lose no more than one in Victoria. That is eighty-one seats.
How then will it be close? Why is Kenny, of all people, lying?
Morgan, which rings mobile phones and asks people their actual preferences, has Labor steady on 52.5. That is six hundred thousand votes more than the Coalition. Newspoll, whose landlines-only methodology had Romney ahead, or competitive, all last year, puts it on 48, and Abbott has just riled PNG with lies about O’Neill that will go down badly in Western Sydney. Why would it be close?
I ask Mark Kenny, a hitherto honourable man, to gratify this readership with a response.
Name:
But say if the result comes down to Bob Katter, and he backs his greatest friend in politics to give him the 76 needed, wouldn’t Katter’s career end in tatters.
Why? Katter is a rural socialist. He wants government to build infrastructure. There is no doubt that Labor builds more infrastructure than the Liberals. His constituency will not complain if it is being built. He was also smiling about the cheap loans to farmers recently, as were a few farmers.
Not sure his constituents are rural socialists. Anyway, he could have backed Julia if he wanted the government to build infrastructure.
He did back Julia. He said he would always vote Yes on Confidence and Supply.
Or am I wrong?
In the days post 2010 election before Oakeshott and Windsor announced who they’d support, Katter was the first to come out officially at a decision. He announced he would support Tony Abbott. He split with Oakeshott and Windsor. But in the end, it didn’t matter because Oakeshott, Windsor, Bandt and Wilkie got Gillard over the line. It was then that Katter said he accepted his fellow Independents’ decision and wouldn’t vote against Gillard on the floor.
A short excerpt from http://www.news.com.au/features/federal-election/bob-katter-backs-tony-abbott-for-pm/story-fn5tas5k-1225915307458
“NORTH Queensland Independent MP Bob Katter has broken ranks from fellow Independents Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor and wants the Coalition leader Tony Abbott to be prime minister.
Mr Oakeshott and Mr Windsor will reveal their decision on who they will back at 3pm (AEST).
“I am confirming that I’m backing the Coalition,” he said.
“I like Julia personally. If they go the other way she’s got one vote up her sleeve.”
Mr Katter said his decision would have no bearing on fellow Independents Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott.
Mr Katter said he would respect Mr Windsor’s and Mr Oakeshott’s decision on which of the two major parties to back.
“They have very moral convictions and they will follow through on those convictions,” he said inside his office at Parliament House.
“I will most certainly respect whatever decision they make.”
Mr Katter said he had not told Prime Minister Julia Gillard or Opposition Leader Tony Abbott of his decision before calling the press conference.
“I haven’t told anybody at all,” he said.
Mr Katter said his decision would have been different had Kevin Rudd still been Labor leader.”
Thanks Sally.
Katter was at all times trying to sway Windsor and Oakeshott to back the coalition; he pretended to be undecided for the purpose of continuing to try to sway them.
He made his own announcement as another ploy in ramping up the pressure on them to go with the coalition.
He failed on all counts.
isn’t bob a performance artist in the mould of Monkton.. Gillies.. and Mcdonald ?
katter you mean? Monkton is closest; the others are too self-aware to compare. I hang on to Katter as continuing proof that this world is, thankfully, a fignment of my imagination
Monkton is mad, Katter is somewhat amusing, both Gillies and McDonald were/are very good comedians.
OT Max Gillies used to share my artist friend, Ron’s huge terrace house in Balmain, a good tenant as well.
Yes Labor will win by 8-10 seats.
I want very badly to believe you Mr Ellis, but Newspoll is a very well-respected poll and the most accurate we have. For example, For what it is worth in terms of accuracy, in the final polls prior to the 2010 election Roy Morgan had the ALP on 51.5 and Coalition on 48.5, while Newspoll had the ALP on 50.2 and the Coalition on 49.8. The final 2PP result was 50.1 to 49.9.
Newspoll has been right on the money every past state and Federal election that I can remember. Roy Morgan has been so far out most of the time it made Galaxy look reliable. I cannot remember a time when Newspoll was wrong. So regardless of the methodology, it must be doing something right as its the only one that is consistently accurate and trustworthy. Morgan, for its wide methology, is usually way off base and its why commentators all respect Newspoll and never acknowledge Morgan. Morgan is not a serious or credible player in psephology.
Newspoll will be very close to the actual result as it identifies “a late swing to the government” - to salvage its own credibility, only when it can no longer influence the voters.
The American pollsters got it so wrong because they were still trying to influence West Coast voters with their last polls. In Oz, the west matters little (sorry, sandgropers).
Why, then, does it exclude five million Australians from its sample? And why will it not reveal the average age of its respondents? It was accurate in 2010, when everyone still had landlines, but in 2012, when a third of America did not, it predicted Romney, right up to midnight on election night.
It may well be right on election night this year, but it has for two years now now been deliberately sampling old people and fabricating polls that are lies.
It cannot afford to be wrong on election day. On seventy-eight other days, it can.
Which Liberal shadow minister do you work for?
Please let me know.
I don’t work for any politician, Liberal or otherwise. Never have. All I meant is that political commentators refer to Newspol the most, Morgan doesn’t seem to be respected. Whatever has happened in the last 2 years with the way Newspoll works, I don’t know. What I am saying is that it is the universally respected one. I’m not sure I buy into the conspiracy theories about Murdoch this, Murdoch that. It sounds way too far-fetched to me, too out there, I’d like to see the proof of these accusations that it is fabricated.
Look, just like you I really want Roy Morgan to be right, but Newspoll seems to be the one everyone, from Antony Green to commentors down, refer to. Hopefully R.M will be right this time, believe me I would love nothing more than it to be right.
So you think Murdoch DIDN’T lie to the House of Commons? And he would never lie, or tell his minion O’Shannessy, to lie to you?
That is strange, Sally, because Morgan has long done face to face interviews, when their clients can afford it. They are more expensive, and more accurate.
Phone Polls are cheap and inaccurate, but for marketing purposes quite adequate.
It is my view that they do not accurately assess complex political opinions. I doubt I am wrong.