Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Krudd Runs Out Of Wheels

Just when Ackers was getting ready to pop his cork, another dil in the APL helped the Libs hold onto one of those ever receding sixteen marginal seats.

Putting up an anit-Zionist campaign manager in a significantly Jewish electorate is not a strategy for winning the prize for best bar mitzvah. However, the ALP figures it's a good scheme.

It ain't over til the fat lady sings and the young Kruddy seems unable to stay in tune for the Grande Finale.

9 comments:

Ackers said...

Adolf you are just cluesless. It's obvious now why you swallowed Dubya's spin lock stock and barrel on Iraq. You'll believe anything, even the lame allegations of a party going down the tubes. This is not panning out the way you or the Liberal party spinmeisters would like to think it is. The swing is on and it's not going to be pretty.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/federal-election-2007-news/dirty-dozen-smear/2007/11/20/1195321782646.html

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22795737-29277,00.html

Ackers said...

http://larvatusprodeo.net/2007/11/21/liberal-dirt-unit-is-working-overtime/

What's REALLY happening Adolf....

FAIRFACTS MEDIA said...

I still think there's time Ackers for a change.
I recall the UK election in 1992 where Labour under Neil kinnock led until the last minute.
He grew cocky and made himself appear an arrogant tosser at 'the Sheffield rally.'
Then John major was re-elected PM for the tories in a last minute surge.
there is often the case of some polls under recording Tory support as people are more likely to be afraid to admit these leaninbgs to pollsters.
I saw the latest Australian poll where labor's lead has shrunk a little.
Howard has a hard task ahead of him. But it is still not impossible.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Akers, where have you been? The 'Bush Doctrine' now is standard fare from all the Democrat presidential wannabes. Why, even the egregiously deplorable New York Times seems to recognise this but the news doesn't seem to have filtered through to your mossy log in the nether regions of Tasmania.

Ackers said...

You're right fairfacts, I'm about the most positive of all my friends none of whom think it beyond the possibility of Johnnie making the comeback of all comebacks. If he does there will be many a redface amongst the psephologists, in fact we may as well pronouce the profesion dead.

Ackers said...

From today's Crikey......something here for those praying for Howard to be re elected. (We know who you are and we will come after you!)

Abjorensen: Too many variables to be sure of a Ruddslide
Norman Abjorensen writes:



Despite a persuasively convincing imitation, the Howard government isn’t yet dead in the water, the dismal polls notwithstanding. It could still scrape back, but minus Howard.

There are simply too many variables to be absolutely cocky about a large Rudd victory.

If we use the polls as a guide, we have the following order of probability:

1. A very large Rudd victory

2. A large Rudd victory

3. A narrow Rudd victory

4. A tied result

5. A narrow Howard victory

6. A large Howard victory

7. A very large Howard victory

Let’s apply the Rumsfeld logic to the situation (and try very hard not to end up with Iraq as the answer). There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know.

What we do know is that Howard is on the nose everywhere; WorkChoices is a stinker. What we also know is that he lies and that interest rates continue to rise. But what we know we don’t know is how this will translate into seats won, lost and held on Saturday night – the only thing that matters.

We know that we know that many people make up their minds in the last week, even on the day – perhaps a quarter of the electorate. We know that we don’t know how many of these have responded to the polls and whether that response was a provisional or a final answer. We also know that we don’t know how even the swing will be.

Rudd needs 16 seats to win government, but let’s assume the Liberals pick up the two ALP held marginals in the west, Cowan and Swan, which looks at least possible. That makes 18 seats for Rudd to seize.

Clearly there will be a swing of sorts and a not insubstantial one. We can with some confidence therefore write off in likely falling order the following 16 government seats: Kingston (SA), Bonner (Qld), Wakefield (SA), Makin (SA), Braddon (Tas), Wentworth (NSW), Bass (Tas), Moreton (Qld), Solomon (NT), Lindsay (NSW), Eden-Monaro (NSW), Bennelong (NSW), Dobell (NSW), Deakin (Vic), McMillan (Vic) and Corangamite (Vic).

That first tranche of possible marginal losses falls with a swing of 5.3 per cent or less, but it excludes two government-held marginals in WA, Stirling and Hasluck, which would fall to Labor with swings respectively of 2 per cent and 1.8 per cent.

At this point, the ALP would need to pick up two more seats – and if the government manages to hold one of the above, then three more seats.

Watching the count at home on television, the benchmark seats then become the crunchers: Boothby (SA) with a swing of 5.4 per cent, Page (NSW) 5.5, Blair (Qld) with 5.7 per cent, and La Trobe (Vic) 5.8.

If Labor takes these, then government is Kevin Rudd’s – but only just.

Should there be a continuing swing against the coalition, the following seats requiring a swing of under seven per cent become the ones to watch:

Herbert (Qld), Paterson (NSW), Kalgoorlie (WA), McEwen (Vic), Longman (Qld), Cowper (NSW) Sturt (SA) and Robertson (NSW).

Anything above this in magnitude will see Labor in with a comfortable majority and could even threaten Peter Costello in Higgins, requiring a swing of 8.8 per cent to fall.

But these are simply the unknown unknowns lurking in the twilight zone of the voters’ minds. The task for Labor historically and practically is not easy; it verges on the unprecedented.

A revised order of probability using the Rumsfeldian method might read:

1. A large Rudd victory

2. A narrow Rudd victory

3. A narrow Coalition victory

4. A tied result

5. A very large Rudd victory

6. A large Howard victory

7. A very large Howard victory

It is not therefore entirely inconceivable that the Coalition could yet be back with, say, a two-seat majority.

Ackers said...

Gold.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/

I think they call this implosion Adolf.

Andrew Robb looks like the man who has fallen of his wheels here.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22799667-5001021,00.html

Ackers said...

C'mon Adolf. You gotta admit Jackie Kelly is a class act.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=327460

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Ackers.

Would you please try to keep your comments to just half an encyclopaedia.

A class act? Stupid bitch should be shot but I doubt her antics will affect the final result. You blokes have got to win not sixteen but eighteen marginal seats if the polls out of WA are anything like accurate.

I'm sticking by my early call of a Lib/Nat victory by four seats with Howard losing Bennelong, thus delivering the new leadership Krudd promised Australians. Except it will be Costello.

Doncha just love politics?