Posts filed under 'Weekly Poll'
I let this poll run for a few extra days as I couldn’t see the point of cutting it off half a week before Kevin Rudd apologised. Now that the text of the apology has been released to the public and we are 13 hours away from the official apology, it seems like an appropriate time to close the poll.
Do you support Kevin Rudd’s plan to apologise to the stolen generation?
Total Votes: 40
Started: February 4, 2008
I am very surprised. Despite my own answer of “no” (which have only become more adamant now that I’ve seen the apology), I was expecting at least 80% of respondents to answer “yes”. Obviously I’m not as alone as I thought on the matter, and I seriously underestimated the public sentiment.
There will be a new weekly poll on Thursday which will also go for about a week and a half.
Samuel
February 12th, 2008 at 08:05pm
Next week on the 13th of February, Kevin Rudd plans to apologise to the stolen generation, so before we get there, a question:
Do you support Kevin Rudd’s plan to apologise to the stolen generation?
Total Votes: 40
Started: February 4, 2008
Kevin Rudd is adamant that his apology will not lead to compensation, although you can be guaranteed that it will be tested in court at some stage, especially seeing as Bruce Trevorrow, the first stolen generation Aborigine to receive compensation, received an additional quarter of a million dollars last week. Compensation is only part of the issue though, there is also the debate over whether the current government should apologise for the acts of a previous government, whether a blanket apology or a selective apology is appropriate, and whether or not we even need to apologise.
The issue is undoubtedly a minefield of controversy, hence the reason for keeping the question simple. If you want to elaborate on your answer, please feel free to do so in the comments below.
Last week’s question was:
Should the Australian Navy be deployed to stop the whaling?
Total Votes: 29
Started: January 21, 2008
Whilst the majority say “yes”, 41% is still an awful lot of opposition. I would be interested to know what method the 41% would use to stop the whaling, if they want it stopped at all.
Samuel
February 4th, 2008 at 03:44am
Despite last week’s drama in the Southern Ocean, the whaling continues. The debate over what we should do about it also continues (albeit a bit quieter than last week).
Should the Australian Navy be deployed to stop the whaling?
Total Votes: 29
Started: January 21, 2008
As usual, please feel free to leave a comment below if you would like to elaborate on your answer.
Results from previous polls can be seen by clicking here.
Samuel
January 21st, 2008 at 07:30am
Here are the results from this week’s election poll.
Who do you plan on giving your first preference to in the House of Representatives election on November 24?
-
Democrats
-
Greens
-
Labor
-
Liberal/National Coalition
-
Other
Total Votes: 58
Started: November 17, 2007
Interestingly it more or less mirrors the result of a lot of larger polls, especially when you compare the two major parties. It also, much like some larger polls, noticed a swing back to the Liberal party towards the end of the week, but not enough to get them over the line.
When you turn that in to a 150 seat figure, you get the following results:
Labor: 56.89655172
Liberal: 51.72413793
Greens: 20.68965517
Democrats: 15.51724138
Other: 5.172413793
Obviously you can’t have partial seats, so the numbers then get wound back to:
Labor: 56
Liberal: 51
Greens: 20
Democrats: 15
Other: 5
Total: 147
This leaves three seats to fill, so we use the original figures and see which three groups were closest to reaching another full seat, and give them those seats. Those groups are Labor, Liberal, Greens.
So, the Samuel’s Blog Election Poll final result says this will be the makeup of the new House of Representatives.
Labor: 57
Liberal: 52
Greens: 21
Democrats: 15
Other: 5
Samuel
November 24th, 2007 at 01:07pm
As it has now passed midnight, the election poll has been closed.
I will post the results and some analysis in the next few hours.
Samuel
November 24th, 2007 at 12:16am
You may recall that in May I ran a two party preferred poll to see who people thought they might vote for at the federal election. The results showed a first preference win to the coalition, 49% to 41%, over Labor, with the 10% of people voting “other”.
This time around, with the election just a week away, I’m doing much the same thing, except this time the poll names the four major parties. The results will be announced on election day.
(Results)
I was going to name the parties in double-randomised order, much like the Australian Electoral Commission do with candidates on ballot papers, however I decided to go with alphabetical order as there is too much room for accusations of bias if I list certain parties ahead of others.
If you would like to explain your decision to vote for your chosen party or “other”, then I would be most interested in hearing your point of view in the comments.
It will also be interesting to see how close the results of this poll are to the make-up of the next House of Representatives.
Last week’s poll result was fairly expectable.
Do you think voting should be compulsory?
Total Votes: 41
Started: November 12, 2007
Over two thirds of people agree with compulsory voting…I suppose the remaining 29% can lodge their protest on November 24 by lodging informal votes (not that I condone such behaviour).
Samuel
November 17th, 2007 at 05:14pm
As you’ve probably noticed, over the last few weeks I have been running politically themed polls. Next week I will be running a poll in the lead-up to the election to find out who people will be voting for. That poll will start on Saturday and finish late on Friday November 23, so that I can publish the results on election day. As such, the poll for this week will be a bit shorter than usual, and for that reason I’m not going to throw an election issue at you…instead I’m going to ask you a question which seems to pop up before just about every election:
Do you think voting should be compulsory?
Total Votes: 41
Started: November 12, 2007
I like the idea of compulsory voting simply because government policy and law affects everyone, and I believe that everyone therefore has both the right and responsibility to shape the government.
Last week’s poll was as follows:
Do you think Labor’s environment spokesman, Peter Garrett, was joking when he told 2UE’s Steve Price that Labor will change their policies if elected?
Total Votes: 36
Started: November 5, 2007
I think that was fairly conclusive. The majority of people believe Mr. Garrett was joking, but there is still quite a decent percentage of people who believe Mr. Garrett was being truthful.
Samuel
November 13th, 2007 at 12:06am
On Friday at an airport in Melbourne, Labor’s environment spokesman told 2UE’s Steve Price that Labor will change their policies if elected. Channel Nine’s Richard Wilkins has confirmed that Peter Garrett said this to Price, and Charles Wooley had a similar tale to tell on his national Macquarie Regional Radioworks morning show “Across Australia” on the 8th of October:
I know what Peter (Garrett) is saying, he’s saying to blokes, to people of green persuasion or to others, or even to some journos, he’s saying, ‘Mate, what we say now and what we do then could be two different things.’ Now you know he’s been putting that out.
Peter Garrett says he was joking and that his comment to Price was “jocular”, but Price denies it was a joke, so the poll question for this week is:
Do you think Labor’s environment spokesman, Peter Garrett, was joking when he told 2UE’s Steve Price that Labor will change their policies if elected?
Total Votes: 36
Started: November 5, 2007
I personally have no doubt that Peter Garrett was serious, and I have no doubts that Labor don’t believe a number of their policy positions, and fully intend to do something quite different once elected. I suppose the other possibility is that, if Mr. Garrett was joking, then he was incredibly foolish, as that would be one of the stupidest jokes imaginable in an election campaign…and to be quite honest, I don’t know which is worse, a party which intends to dishonour its word, or a party that continues to support a fool.
Anyway, the results from last week’s poll:
If Australia must sign a climate change agreement, would you prefer Kyoto or a new agreement?
Total Votes: 22
Started: October 29, 2007
It’s hard to know what to make of that. People are clearly divided, and on this issue I think that is perfectly understandable. I would prefer that we don’t sign any agreement, but that wasn’t the question.
For a list of all previous results, see the Weekly Poll Results page.
Samuel
November 5th, 2007 at 12:50am
The weekly poll returns:
If Australia must sign a climate change agreement, would you prefer Kyoto or a new agreement?
Total Votes: 22
Started: October 29, 2007
I would prefer to see no agreement signed, but that’s not an option in this poll, so if we have to sign an agreement, I think Kyoto is an inefficient and outmoded agreement, and we need a new agreement that actually has a chance of being signed by every polluting country.
For a list of all previous results, see the Weekly Poll Results page.
Samuel
October 29th, 2007 at 10:51am
I’m ending the poll a bit earlier than usual this week as I intend on making my announcement this afternoon and there is no point in running the poll after the fact.
Would you like to see Samuel stand as an independent candidate at the upcoming federal election?
Total Votes: 101
Started: September 17, 2007
This is the highest number of people to ever respond to a poll on this website, nearly doubling the previous record. I would like to thank everyone who took part, and also the Canberra media (especially 2CC) who promoted it throughout the week.
I will be making my announcement on the issue shortly. I would suggest that those of you in Canberra who want to hear it should tune in to 2CC around 4:10pm.
Samuel
September 21st, 2007 at 03:47pm
Originally posted Monday, September 17, 2007
Update: This poll has received a fair bit of attention from regular readers of this blog, the Canberra media (2CC in particular), and the people of Canberra, and as such I have decided to bump this back up to the top of the page. I will do so again on Friday. End Update
I thought I might have a bit of fun with the poll this week. Last night I was reading various documents on the Australian Electoral Commision’s website, and discovered something which surprised me…candidates for elections can only be nominated after the writs have been issued. It’s logical when I think about it, as the nominees can only be confirmed as eligible to vote after the rolls have closed (which occurs at 8pm on the day the writs are issued), however it did correct my belief that candidates had to nominate prior to the writs being issued.
This got me thinking about whether or not I would have something to offer the electorate of Fraser as an independent candidate at the upcoming federal election. Admittedly, the chances of me actually unseating the current Labor member for Fraser aren’t great, but it is fairly obvious that I have a lot of views on a lot of subjects, and I think I could make a useful and interesting contribution to parliament.
So, the question this week is:
Would you like to see Samuel stand as an independent candidate at the upcoming federal election?
Total Votes: 101
Started: September 17, 2007
At this stage it is purely speculative. I’m not asking if you would vote for me, and I haven’t even decided if I want to stand for election. That being said, I think I could make a useful contribution, so I would like to know whether or not you would like to see me stand for election.
Now, last week’s poll:
Was APEC beneficial to Australia?
Total Votes: 34
Started: September 10, 2007
No surprises there!
For a list of all previous results, see the Weekly Poll Results page.
Samuel
September 19th, 2007 at 06:43pm
I suppose I can have yet another go at running a weekly poll that only lasts for a week…it would be an interesting change.
To that end, $300 million dollars later…
Was APEC beneficial to Australia?
Total Votes: 34
Started: September 10, 2007
A rather large cost, a city in lockdown, a bunch of world leaders in funny Drizabone coats and an “aspirational” Sydney Declaration. Whilst I probably should give it more time, my answer is definitely “no”, but I’m open to your opinions…perhaps you can find something useful that I overlooked.
Now, the results from the last poll.
Should Victoria cancel their court challenge and hand over control of the Murray Darling river system to the federal government?
Total Votes: 28
Started: July 30, 2007
It seems like an age since I started that poll!
For a list of all previous results, see the Weekly Poll Results page.
Samuel
September 10th, 2007 at 07:21am
Weekly? Probably not…but I should at least try to make it weekly.
Anyway, this week’s question:
Should Victoria cancel their court challenge and hand over control of the Murray Darling river system to the federal government?
Total Votes: 28
Started: July 30, 2007
As fas as I’m concerned, the answer is yes, the water does not belong to Victoria, it belongs to everyone, and the only authority with the power to create laws to affect national property is the federal government. Apart from that, there is a precedent in place which will allow the federal government to take over control anyway, so all Victoria are doing by mounting a high court challenge is wasting an awful lot of taxpayers’ money.
That being said, I’m only one voice in many, so I look forward to your responses.
The last poll I ran had the following results:
Does it annoy you when Samuel doesn’t write something he said he was going to write?
Total Votes: 29
Started: July 2, 2007
I’m glad it’s not just me who doesn’t like not keeping to my plans!
For a list of all previous results, see the Weekly Poll Results page.
Samuel
July 30th, 2007 at 06:13am
Another lengthy break between polls got me thinking about this question:
Does it annoy you when Samuel doesn’t write something he said he was going to write?
Total Votes: 29
Started: July 2, 2007
It might surprise you to find out that my vote is “yes”, as I get annoyed when I don’t get around to writing things that I have said that I’m going to write.
The previous poll was:
Should the Queen’s Birthday holiday be held on or around the Queen’s actual birthday?
Total Votes: 25
Started: June 11, 2007
I’m glad that the majority of people don’t want the Queen’s Birthday holiday to be on her actual birthday…it would be a logistical nightmare whenever the monarch changed, and it would further erode the balance of holidays throughout the year.
For a list of all previous results, see the Weekly Poll Results page.
Samuel
July 2nd, 2007 at 06:50am
Today (Monday) is the Queen’s Birthday holiday in all states of Australia except for Western Australia, yet Queen Elizabeth II has her birthday on the 21st of April. Without going into a debate about whether the holiday should be forced on to a Monday, here is the poll question for this week.
Should the Queen’s Birthday holiday be held on or around the Queen’s actual birthday?
Total Votes: 25
Started: June 11, 2007
Last week I asked the following question:
What do you think the overall quality of television programming?
-
Better than it used to be
-
Roughly the same as it used to be
-
Worse than it used to be
Total Votes: 29
Started: June 3, 2007
I have to admit that I was quite surprised that so many people share my view of television. I suppose it’s a good thing there is an “off” button!
For a list of all previous results, see the Weekly Poll Results page.
Samuel
June 11th, 2007 at 04:26am
Next Posts
Previous Posts