Interesting update and perspective. So 'climate change' is increasing as an issue, afer a temporary slump. Is this because of the media associated with the ETS and/or the improving economy?

“That’s if voters are all that interested in these issues in the first place.”

Yes Graham. So what proportion of the people polled are really interested in the issues? How many of them just give an answer to a poll question without having any real feeling about the relevant issue?

It is all based on seeking the views of a mob of largely apathetic people who don’t have anything more than a very flimsily founded view on some aspects and no view at all on other aspects that they are asked questions about but to which they give categorical answers.

The number of people within any polled sample that can give well-founded answers about issues pertaining to the quality of government or the relative abilities of the labs and the libs is very small indeed.

This is also true, just to a slightly lesser extent, for polls such as the one used for the purposes of this article, which are not based on randomly selected people, but are drawn from the views of those who wish to participate.

“…with care, results from this sample can be interpreted to be indicative of results in the broader community”

Hmmm. So the pollsters are aware that the ‘panel’ of respondents is not representative of the whole community. One then wonders how they manipulate the results to make it more representative, and whether this is actually more representative or just more in line with what they think the community thinks…or perhaps more in line with their views!

You’ve also got the problem of so much crap being involved in determining peoples’ views, such as Utegate, while issues of importance take a minor place….and some issues of vital importance such as continuous growth versus sustainability never ever get a run!

Meanwhile, Rudd continues to take us towards the cliff even faster than Howard did. And Turnbull continues to offer absolutely nothing to combat this gross antisustainabilityism…..and the media, general community and pollsters just completely miss it.

Ludwig,

Dead right about opinion polls - you have to wonder how much store to put in the views of a fickle public that aren't really committed to anything much (except what immediately impacts on their lives). Most people, when asked for their opinion, recite the last bit of group-think that someone got away with just before them.

In a lot of ways people are on a conveyor belt where the game is more about not looking like an idiot or someone who is out of place than someone that with their own considered view. But, the reality is it's only those that clearly think about issues on their merits that actually make a positive difference.

About the only use of opinion polls is to give some guide to the parties about how to garner political support. But, if you ask me, the stats in Graham's article show how complex and fickle the whole business is. In another paradigm, the stats can get completely turned on their heads. Does this mean a particular issue is not just as important as it ever was? Nope, just that something else has become flavour of the month.

I'd say that the mere fact the topic of sustainability never gets a run means that you're onto something. Give it a few years and a few disasters or near-misses and the group-think may change to something more substantial and less transitory, I suspect. People also have a lot of momentum tied up in old, redundant ideas that need to get played out and demonstrated as being complete garbage before anything successful will be achieved.

Think back to any of the big reformers or new thinkers who challenged the status quo - Copernicus, Luther, Galileo, Pasteur - to see how entrenched the opposition was.

The figures Grahame produces are usually quite accurate.

To my untrained eye the tables Grahame produced show me people are starting to look at issues likely to be underlying the next election.

The media has been full of stories of Kevvy wanting an early election and seeking a double dissolution. I think that's starting to awaken people to the real political issues ... for the first time since the last election.
If I was Malcolm Turnbull the only things I'd talk about between now and the next election are Kevvy's failures and avoidances in his proclaimed Health policy, kevvy's stupid misspendings on halls and classrooms in his fake Education revolution, the likely cost and shortcomings of kevvy's unrealistic universal broadband internet coverage, and the accumulation of kevvy's (un)repayable government debt. I'd scare the crap out of people by talking about how the costs of these things kevvy's has mismanaged are to impact on interest rates.

I'd talk about whales, why relations with China, Japan, Indonesian and the US are so sour. In Queensland I'd talk about the ALP and kevvy's relationship with political donors from China.

I'd ignore the rantings of the government global warmers and focus on Peter (The spoof) Garrett, as the next international climate change conference will take care of all these issues and fools.

And the media ... well I'd point out how they are letting Australia down in their biased reporting (yep the Libs have nothing left to lose by doing that). I'd ask any left-leaning reporter, and they are numerous, what is the current situation with an Ausatralian citizen, one Mr Hu.

I'd ask Rupert if he was serious about his expressed need for quality reporting? Yep good ole Rupert has finally come round to the idea people will pay for quality reporting, besides advertising, when it's accessible 'on the net' (Jeez Grahame you were ahead of your time, can I buy shares in OLO?). I reckon he would increase his advertising revenue in his 'paper' vehicles if he applied the same principle!

But I am a bit of a joker at times!