Nice to see Online Opinion breaking some news and research of your own - congrats. I look forward to your forthcoming articles from the survey - and in particular reading more about how you can account or correct for the "internet effect" in your research sample - ie. an online survey naturally brings its own self-selection and other effects into the sample...

All the best

Mercurius

Dear Graham,
thanks for your article but it seems that a few statements included offer an insight into why indigenous australians are still in the same predicament as they were in 1967.
The particular paragraphs;

(They are Australians who have a strongly European sense of national identity. They don’t believe in the “black armband” view of history, they think that schools ought to teach facts, that rights ought to be matched by responsibilities, and that commonsense and intrinsic knowledge ought to prevail over academic theories. Many of them also possess a particular moral view of the world which is conservatively Christian.)

In particular " They think that schools ought to teach facts."
I would point out that there are many ' facts' of history that have not been taught pertaining to australian history 1788 onwards.
And that this history has been excluded by conservative academics in higher education and down the line to infant schools.
Of course the connection with the conservative politicians and their masters, is a key as to why the truth has been unwritten till the last twenty five years, yet it still isn't exposed to the masses unless searched for, and who in your voter survey would be searching for australian history that flies in the face of their racist beliefs.
Howard himself is just as arrogant ignorant on the subject of education in that area, we don't want to start something to upset the bipartheit dictatorship eh?
John Howard is currently playing a game with voters to try and show he 'cares'
His history of sending young people to invade other countries show's how much he cares.
His refusing in the face of approval of every health minister in australia to make some illegal drugs available to addicts by pescription in the light of the health dangers for them, their children etc. Shows how much he can ' care'
He used the support of that giant leech of the poor, " the salvation army" to give support to his denial of democracy.
Yes we know ' who cares'
Good article Graham.
Cheers Neil

“Howard used to be one of them, but now they suspect he’s traded-in his chesty bonds and Y-front for some designer flimsies, and he’s no longer listening.”

I think this just about nails it, Graham.

The Coalition took government promising to govern for all Australians, and undertaking the highest standards of ministerial responsibility ever seen in this country. The ministerial standards lasted less than half a term, and “non-core promise” entered the language, indicating that governing for all Australians was highly conditional.

As you say, he’s upset everyone at least once, by abandoning standards, breaking promises, and implementing policies that a huge number of Australians find deeply distasteful.

Howard’s great talent has been to convince us that everything, absolutely everything, can be traded off for economic growth. However workchoices has broken the spell. He can’t convince parents to allow their kids to be exploited in their pizza-delivery jobs as a trade-off for the parents’ own economic prosperity. He can’t convince highly leveraged young families that having their job on the line every single day is better for them in the long run.

Having broken this spell, he’s pushing it uphill to re-gain the trust of those “values” voters. Now that it’s become clear that he’s governing not for everyone, but for the holders of capital, it’s not possible to go back to accepting the trade-off.

My theory of electoral fortunes is based substantially on rainfall futures: no rain > Rudd wins handsomely; good rain > Howard has a chance of holding on. The rain has already spoken in the eastern states (except for the Brisbane catchment) so keep a close eye on the Southern Oscillation Index! As to Brisbane, the punters have already decided which donkey they will pin the tail onto and Beattie knows this - which is why he has signalled his retirement.

I was not offered the opportunity to vote in the survey, but I'd like to submit my opinion as to why I won't vote for the Liberals whilst John Howard remains their leader.

In a word..... Honor. The very characteristic that Howard so sadly lacks. The man is a "core" lier, therefore he has no honor and should not be given a single ounce of respect. Ten years is not a long time. Many haven't forgotten Tampa. I doubt even those not quite young enough to vote at the time will have forgotten about his back flip on GST. His attempted destruction of workers hard fought for rights will certainly not be forgotten ten years down the track. And for the sake of all blue collar workers, let us never forget the Howard factor in the 1998 waterside workers strike. Howard proved what a gutless little mongrel he was then. Nothing has changed.

He has, and continues to flood our once beautiful country with immigrants, all in the name of expanding his ever important "economy." His precious economy is squeezing the life blood out of ordinary hard working Australians and squeezing the opportunity of home ownership out of young Australian's dreams.
Not content with his attempts at crushing workers, Howard has shifted his sights to the less empowered.....those who through misfortune or poor choice have to rely on a miserable income from Government coffers. Is he so out of touch, he really believes people on Newstart have an easy life? Or those on other welfare payments?
Now he's targeting our indigenous peoples. He's given them nothing in his ten years of power and only now he sees a "crisis" just before an election?

Howard is power hungry, no, power crazed! Men like that have no honor and men like Howard will never get my vote.

I've posted this joke before but once again it seem so apt. Enjoy

The Australian Prime Minister, John Howard was in England meeting the
Queen at Balmoral. They were discussing Australia and Howard's plans
for the future.

Howard asked the queen if it was possible to turn Australia into a
Kingdom to increase its force in the world market. The Queen replied,
"One needs a King for a Kingdom and you are most certainly not a
King."

He then asks if it is possible to turn Australia into an Empire. The
Queen replies, "For an Empire one needs an Emperor you are most
certainly not an Emperor."

Howard thinks for a moment and then asks if it is possible to turn
Australia into a principality. The Queen replies, "For a principality
one needs a Prince and you Mr. Howard are certainly not a prince."

The Queen adds further, "Without meaning to be rude Mr. Howard I think
Australia should remain as a country."

Graham: You would have to be a liberal or what is called a howard hugger.
'Honest?' Howard is an unmitigated grubby liar which makes him completely untrusworthy and totally deceitful added to this he is divisive and even more arrogant than Hawke. And his sending the national's leader around the country come election time with a big brown paper bag buying votes is reprehensible. I know some will squeak, as howard does, "but the others have done it when they were in power" but that does not make it honest,decent or honourable. But heh! as a Queenslander who remembers Joh and his misfits, who better to send out with a proverbial brown paper bag than the leader of the Nits err sorry Gnats - wrong again its the nats. Regards, numbat

graham - thank you for writing up the results of the survey. it constantly amazes me that the furphy that the economy is booming, or going along 'okay', or 'on the up and up' is accepted by the media and the opposition. how can the economy be fine, when there are such huge disaparities in incomes - $aus millions for corporate 'kings' and (un)living wage for the 'ordinary' worker who has no clout as now dealt with by the fair (sic) pay commission. the economy cannot be 'okay' when we now see many, many people without liveable wages; when we see many unemployed - and those labelled 'employed' as engaged in paidemployment for as little as one hour a week - because they cannot secure jobs with higher levels of working hours. how can the economy be 'booming' when the rates of bankruptcy are soaring? how can the economy be 'fine', when thousands of australians are unable to buy a home. how can it be 'on the up and up' if many australians are being evicted from their homes as wages do not cover repayments - that once were covered by incomes?

(to be continued)

continued ...
australia once was a country where everyone was seen as having a right to the opportunity of buying a home - owning a home and the real possibility for many/most to do so. this principle no longer applies. it is nonsense to say that those who cannot afford a home should go to the backblocks in order to purchase. first, the backblocks are too expensive for many and, anyway, travel costs (mmmm petrol anyone) make this 'option' less than feasible. when will someone in a position of power begin to articulate the reality for too many australians - that the economy is in regression as huge numbers of australians are not being well served, and a few are being enabled to gross-out on greed.

the economy can be 'fine' or 'okay' in the current climate only if 'economy' and 'economics' are seen as unrelated to humanity - as unrelated to the humanbeings who should be served by the economy and economics. the economy can be 'on the up and up' or 'booming' only if 'economy' and 'economics' are seen as having nothing to do with the rights and wellbeing of *all* citizens and residents of the country.

when will the opposition begin to see that its constant acquiesance to the nonsense of the 'excellent' economy does not reflect what is happening in australia - particularly the australia the alp is supposed to represent.

Careful Joss,
You start sprouting posts like that.. 'they'are likely to start on you as being one of those rare almost extinct species that would like to see some equality in a population, if not the entire world. Oh yes some might say mmmm could be a socialist in our midst, and others start to utter the word ' pinko' then before you know it, you've been branded ' a raving trotskyistic commo ratbag'
I myself would be too far left for any trots, I'd scare the daylights out of em.
I hope you have some success convincing others about equality but don't hold your breath.
Cheers Neil

From the Hansard, 6th April 1998.

In the Grievance debate on 6th April Mr ALBANESE (Member for Grayndler) said:

"Today my grievance is against the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) for his failure to provide leadership. You can trim the eyebrows; you can cap the teeth; you can cut the hair; you can put on different glasses; you can give him a ewe's milk facial, for all I care; but, to paraphrase a gritty Australian saying, 'Same stuff, different bucket.' In the pantheon of chinless blue bloods and suburban accountants that makes up the Australian Liberal Party, this bloke is truly one out of the box. You have to go back to Billy McMahon to find a Prime Minister who even approaches this one for petulance, pettiness and sheer grinding inadequacy. I read the late Paul Hasluck's description of Billy McMahon, and I cannot find a thing that does not describe this Prime Minister equally well:

I confess to a dislike of McMahon. The longer one is associated with him the deeper the contempt for him grows and I find it hard to allow him any merit. Disloyal, devious, dishonest, untrustworthy, petty, cowardly - all these adjectives have been weighed by me and I could not in truth modify or reduce any one of them in its application to him."

Howard will loose because he is disloyal, devious, dishonest, untrustworthy, petty and cowardly. It has just taken the majority of Australians 10 years to figure this out.

Anyone who thinks that Rudd is more honest than Howard is most definately indulging in thinking of the wishful kind.
Even through the TV you can see Rudd's real exexpression trying to escape through the painted on one, & the 10 ton press, holding down, what he would realy like to say.
There is none so blind as those who do not want to see, or those who don't care. Those who voted fot Keating proved that.

Then, perhaps my judgment, is becomming clouded by my growing disgust, over the last couple of years, with another lying polly called Beattie, who must have now captured the record for lying, to match the one for imcompetence, he already holds.

If it takes a drought like the current one to get rid of the Rodent, then it might even be worth it.

"After 16 years of continuous economic expansion they’re looking for something grander" states Graham.

Indeed they are - dont underestimate the yearning for the truth every now and again - we've been starved of it for a while under this regime.

Equally the "BOOM" in the boom times has had the effect of blowing a large number of people out of the economic water -

Head lines in the Hun suggest the Feds may release Commonwealth land to take the heat out of the lack of affordabiltiy of Australian housing - a feature of our market for years - so why now I aks meself.

At the same time they will contend lack of land is the states fault.

Dont be surprised if they very soon look seriously at the incidence of bankruptcy, mortgagee sales as well as the lending practices of financial insitutions prior to the election - when i say a serious look that is all I mean - they will just look at it long enough to give the impression of acting.

- post election all eyes will return to admiring the rising stock market and commodity prices. The only indicator of economic prosperity this government relies upon

The grander things the electorate are looking for is vision, integrity and justice - once hall marks of good government - as for this mob those things would seem to be some what forieign concepts.

Interesting logic in the article....except he didn't account very well for why the Coalition is doing so well in WA.

If the argument is that WA has no water problems then the author is not up to speed. Significant agricultural areas in WA have been in a state of drought for four years, not least those areas that are supposed to grow chickpeas and other pulses. The water table around Perth City has sunken to critically dangerous levels.

Labor in WA is on the nose for reasons of high scandal and corruption and this has obviously been a major factor in the national Coalition's support there. Added to that the demise of their local hero Kim B.

Still, I'll give the federal election to Labor, but just by a nose at present. There's a lot more water to go under the bridge before we get to mark our ballot papers

'Howard’s a good card player, but even the best can’t take every trick.'

The problem that Howard faces this year, is that those who have have been tricked hold all the aces this round. They know it and can't wait to show.

The first time voters, comprising the young and new citizens, will be looking for a leader that plays the game fairly, no tricks, just a full house of policies that can deliver sustainability, prosperity after peak oil and social justice.

Oh, and casting a vote may reflect the hope of war weary citizens of regaining the credibility we once enjoyed in the world, before becoming known globally as best mates to a neo-con oilman who loves a high stakes game that every day seems to be leading humanity closer to a place we don't want to go - Armageddon.

those who are looking forward to rudd getting in, ought to go back and read animal farm, it ends something like "couldn't tell the difference".

any pollie is closer to any other pollie than any pollie is like a people.

"Faced with a choice between certainty and uncertainty, they have always gone for certainty."
Regrettably, the only certainty about John Howard is that he won't change.
Death by water - now there's a good notion, but I'm not fixated on drowning as the only way.

Nobody has mentioned the media's role in all this. While the media allows and indeed encourages Kevin Rudd to spout nonsense about "if we withdraw from Iraq we will no longer be a terrorist target" and "we must focus on Asia which is where we belong" - then we are headed for disaster in the form of a Labor government that does not even begin to understand the true nature of international relations.
We were a terrorist target long before we went into Iraq - simply because we are viewed as a geographically isolated Western nation - and for that reason we do not belong in Asia either.
I am sure that Asia is happy to do business with us but we are not, and never will be, part of the Asian "family". Once we acknowledge that our relationship with Asia will improve a thousand fold but they see us as guests, not relations.

There is a consistency to John Howard that underpins his career. His attitudes to things economic have not changed in any fundamental way in 25 years. Ditto with social issues, the man remains a conservative. Likewise foreign policy. For all his 'lies' and policy two-stepping, nobody can claim he is inconsistent in his core ideas. He convinced the authors "working class conservatives" that he shared their "aspirations", and their fears. Graeme then says that these same people now feel that he has "reneged on the deal".
"relaxed and comfortable" is one thing that no government can deliver in an open economy, with a floating dollar and rampant capitalism ala "private equity" firms.

Graeme states that Labor is more credible on climate change and the environment. I guess so, but am not too convinced. Kyoto? worthless symbolism. Carbon trading? More BS. The mother of all fear campaigns? You betcha!

I am dubious of all sides of oz politics on this, and am waiting for someone to embrace alternative energy ideas not from a position of fear but as a bold initiative for the future: for clean air, for economic advantage, and for an exciting future. There is a sense of drift right now that cries out for a new 'Snowy Mts scheme', namely a thumping great CSP project. Howard has failed us on this issue. Can only hope Rudd will come up with something concrete.

On the subject of lies, does nobody else remember the earnest discussions and thoughtful beard stroking of the Hawke/Keating years as bewildered supporters sought to understand the (then) latest backflip or about-face from their govt? Pages were devoted to this question and the consensus seemed to be that the backflip was in fact a sign of strength and character. These things are relative I guess.

With all due respect for Graham and his research, it is not we politically interested opinionators who will make the difference on polling day. The uninterested, uninformed and non-participating people in marginal seats will decide who governs here, and the circumstances in which they govern.

Most commenters here were araldited to one side or the other long before the polls went sour for Howard. As much as we all have our pet theories about what motivates voters and who should be running the place, and our pet issues, it's people who would rather have major surgery without anaesthetic than think about politics or governance who ultimately decide.

That's my pet theory. For today anyway.

The very fact that Howard refuses to take lessons from history - in fact, lately it seems he wants to print his own version of history - similar to GW Bush and his neo-Cons - makes one count him out for a start.

The most serious of course, his ability to not only disclose the state of our foreign debt, replaced by having Costello mesemerise us with the fortunate state of the Future Fund still much less than the foreign debt, but in all the ability to be not untruthful by holding back the truth.

Well, I guess just a typical politician, but though I've never voted for him, thought early in the piece he might be one politician that had a bit of Grace. My God with his spin and his evasions, how wrong I was.

Graham, thanks for the kick start.
WA has chronic problems with water and drought but it is nothing new and they are used to addressing the issue and adjusting to it(at least those who have lived there for awhile). The local newspaper is a great Howard supporter and makes The Australian look left wing.
Beazley made Howard look like a leader, so did Crean and eventually so did Latham.
Kev has a bit more going for him but they are both pretty ordinary in the face of what needs to be done.
The unions are no more an issue than big business which is percieved in the Howard mold of whatever it takes. Telstra, Qantas,Coles,James Hardie etc. are seen as Howards mates and they are not liked.Get over unions Graham.
In my opinion this election is about Howard. He has made it so because he micro manages everything and sticks himself into everything and wants to be on every screen 24/7. Also deep down I think his old ego wants this election to be about himself.
But of course Howard is his own worst enemy and he is now seen to want power for himself and not for the public good, despite his grating appeals to mateship and a fair go.
Bruce Haigh

I think the next Federal election will be very close.The electortate will be loathe to give our country wall to wall Labor both State and Federally.

I can't believe how naive the electorate are about green house gases.It will not make one iota of difference if we all become cave dwellers,live in poverty and have zero carbon emitions since China has decided that it will continue to pollute on a per capita basis until their living standards equal ours.No mention of restraint in terms of population control is even mentioned.It is just Peter Garrett rock populism with no intellectual rigor or substance.

Perhaps John Howard has been tricky once too often,however discipline and substance always outshines good intentions and chaos that our Labor Govts both Federally and State constantly dish up as rational policy.

If Labor wins with their present band of no talent wonders,I'll give them two terms at the most,before they self destruct.Malcolm Turnbull will then become our next prime Minister.

Next prediction? Hillary Clinton will be the first female US president.

Interesting Article.

Lets look at the top few issues in voters minds.

Work/family balance
Consumerism
Caring for kids/Discipline
Abortion
Family relationships/Divorce

Then this "We have never been richer, or fatter"

What is it about 'fatness' and 'richness' that we can learn from ?
Perhaps.. the idea behind this is a shallow perception of 'consequences' ? or.. that we value 'self satisfaction in the short term' (gratification) more than long term outcomes ?

Work/Family Balance. Interesting. We want 'less work' and 'more family'. Fine. Do we want 'cheaper commodities' i.e. cheaper TV's and Washing machines? You can be that the only way we will EVER have that, is by:
a) More effienct production in countries which currently produce them with virtual slave labor conditions.
b) Which of course would mean kicking those virtual slaves out onto the scrapheap of 'scrounge and survive, or die trying'.

There is little likelihood of 'more efficient' production methods, because the simple equation of 'Cost of Capital Outlay' vs 'Cost of Labor over x years' + "We can guarantee slave labor rates by virtue of a despotic/tyrannical/dictatorship government" will mean nothing much happening there soon.
So.. WE want more time with our families? hmmm if we had to pay the REAL price of goods manufactured at REAL just wages for REAL people.. we would have 2 choices.
1/ Lower the 'lifestyle to which we have become accustomed'(don't buy so much 'stuff')
2/ Pay MORE,=Work LONGER= Less family time.

Caring for kids/Discipline ? Good grief.. if we paid the real (just) price for consumer goods, we would have to work so much longer and harder to get that 'stuff' and the kids would go out the window in our flurry to 'get stuff'. (2nd car, Extension,Boat, Holiday place)

I'm painting a pretty simplistic picture here..yes. But there is enough truth in it to be of concern.

Abortion..... yep.. if a child is conceived at an 'economically inconvenient' time, kill him or her.. thats a workable solution, Just do it b4 they become human enough for us to worry about.

Rainier,

How are you? A little dated? Your joke isn't new it is an adaption of one told about Paul Keating many years ago. :-)

I think the authors assessment quite accurate and particularly his view on the recent intervention in Indigenous settlements. I'd love to gain some greater appreciation of Indigenous leaders views on that subject, besides the usual mainstream 'newsworthy' commentators, that is. I need some leadership to assist making up my mind. I'm not sure whether I agree with all or any of Brough's proposals.

regards

Arjay makes an interesting point. I'm wondering what others would say to the proposition that there's only one government, state or federal, that works in Australia, so why hand over federal power to the party that runs all those incompetent governments when the Coalition is doing a reasonable job?

Graham Y, stop "wondering what others would say to the proposition that there's only one government, state or federal, that works in Australia". Bracks has said he doesn't want to go Federal. Next best at doing a "reasonable job" would have to be Carpenter in WA or Rann in SA. Why not put it to them?

Seriously though, your article was deficient in the sense that you conceive of the economy in the traditional way the politicians and economists do - as a single entity with national indicators - when there are many economies in the nation.

From the point of view of voters, the one that matters most is the economy each voter experiences. That would include things like how hard they're finding it to get into the housing market, their level of credit card debt, the compulsion to sign an unfair AWA in order to keep their job, the tenuousness of being made casual with no penalty rates for weekend work, the price of petrol and the cost of getting to work, the fear of interest rates going up again, and so on.

Looked at from this perspective, (and among other things not related to the economy) you might better understand why Howard is on the nose despite what you say about voters' perceptions that he delivers on the economy.

It's the economy, stupid; but not the one Howard and Costello are spruiking.

Coalition doing a reasonable job? GY they are doing an abysmal job. I am sick of "its the Labor States fault".

If the Labor states are so bad, why have they won 21 elections in a row?

I see Bruce Flegg is doing, really really well as Liberal leader in Qld. Ha Ha

G'day,
COMMUNICAT! just trying to get your attention mate, I'd be interested to know why you say OZ was a target for those without the means to conduct a war with a conventional army.. " terrorist"
Before the trade centre building and pentagon attack. in 2001? I know there were many bombings connected with the serb croat disparity here in the sixties that seemed not to worry the Willis govt much at all.. that's code by the way. In fact we were training these 'those without a etc' to go back and do their darndest in their country of birth.. apparently they failed to murder the mayor of a city..and were arrested.
then there is the Hilton bomb murder fiasco compliments of our secret agents govt terrorism? or is that still fantasy in some minds.. Ask Tim Anderson.
So back to the first Q, can you cite me what inspired you to make that comment please. a link will do. if possible.
Oh and on the elections.. my only way is to vote both sides out. vote for any other party but not those two or any that swap prefs with them. Where is tweedle dum tweedle dee.. my hero.
Cheers Neil

“why hand over federal power to the party that runs all those incompetent governments when the Coalition is doing a reasonable job?”

A few responses come to mind here, all of them pretty obvious, so I’m surprised you didn’t think of them before posting this, Graham.

First, the reason our states are being run by a bunch of no-hopers is that the state oppositions are worse. So you could just as easily be asking, “Why would we reinstate in Canberra the party that can’t even organise a chook raffle in the states?”

Second, you don’t have to dig deeply to find federal contributions to state blunders. The difficulties of state health and education departments can at least in part be explained by federal decisions. In particular, Peter Costello’s interventionist approach to state finances means that the feds can’t avoid some of the blame for the situation in the states.

Third, Arjay’s response implies that Australians are consciously strategic in their voting, with the intention of creating a balance in government. Sure, it’s possible to identify a periods when state and federal governments were formed by opposing parties, but I’m sceptical about claims of purposefulness here. That we gave the conservatives power in both houses seems like the most obvious argument against the view that we vote strategically to maintain balance.

Fourth, state Liberal Party branches are disturbingly close to the religious right, especially in NSW. Given the census results that show us becoming less religious, I can’t see what’s happening in the states as providing impetus for returning the federal government.

In short, I reckon we’ll probably decide this one on its federal merits. Far from being strategic, I think we’re most likely to take a look at both sides, and make a decision based on their offerings in this one particular election.

Rainier, Balmoral is in Scotland.

Oh, I'm in the wrong place!

I thought this was an article about Japanese water torture!

It should be, perhaps I'll turn it into a discussion on Japanese water torture?

No...better not.

[the 'White Warlock' runs off into the night...]

LOL. White Warlock, you're funny.

Arjay

If GY is correct Turnbull will not be in the next parliament, you reckon he is going to wait six years?

I doubt it.

An 8% swing to labor looks very likely. That means seats with a 16% margin are in doubt. The Liberal Party will be very different after the election.

Wilson Tuckey may be the next oposition leader. :)

Mal Brough is the newly annointed 'Howard's Hero'. Costello et al have no hope of taking over. It will be 'Johnny's Joke' on them all, especially the faithful lapdog 'Pete the Pup'. Can only hope it is in Opposition. It is time Australia had a conscience again and is able to put true and meaningful reforms in place that have real funding at the grassroots level rather than a pretty bandaid effect. Let's vote for Party Policies and not Party Personalities. There seems to be some confusion out and about over State and Federal reps and Parties, as well as the fact that we do not get to elect the Prime Minister, only the Party they represent. Be informed...information is power.
(And make sure everyone you know is enrolled to vote, particularly if they have recently turned 18 or changed address!!)