A- A A+

‘Lazarus with a triple bypass’ could well become Harry Houdini

6 Comments
John Warhurst |  22 August 2007

‘Lazarus with a triple bypass’ could well become Harry HoudiniLabor remains almost ten points ahead in opinion polls. According to the Reuters Poll Trend, having been ahead by at least ten points ever since Kevin Rudd became its leader last December, Labor has just slipped to a 9.5 per cent lead. How can Rudd lose?

There are a number of factors that should not cause Labor to lose, despite party mythology to the contrary. First, there are some superficial ones that should be disposed of: dirty tricks, rabbits out of a hat and just being habitually unlucky.

Then there are some more significant myths that should be discounted. Labor will not lose because it will self-destruct on policy. Rudd is too careful and cautious about both foreign and domestic policy to allow that.

Labor will not lose because of Rudd’s personal limitations. There have already been allegations made against his character. He has been tested on his personal beliefs and background. Minor scandals aside,  Rudd is a very different person to Mark Latham. This is a key difference between 2004 and 2007. Elections are increasingly a referendum on leadership and Rudd leads Howard as preferred Prime Minister in the polls.

There are, however, four reasons why Labor might still lose.

Howard’s lead in economic management remains one of the government’s strengths. While interest rates and housing affordability might favour Labor, the strong economy is one factor that could still return Howard to office if most voters are content enough with this central aspect of their lives.


‘Lazarus with a triple bypass’ could well become Harry HoudiniBusiness will eventually back the Coalition to the hilt on industrial relations if they believe that they alone stand between Labor and victory. Despite some advocacy, business remains relatively passive, satisfied that Rudd is quite conservative. He is now being pictured by cartoonists as a younger version of Howard. While this horrifies some Labor supporters it is a reassuring image for swinging voters. But business will still back Howard when the chips are down.

The power of incumbency, especially the government advertising blitz, remains very important. We live in a PR state and governments have the power of the PR purse. The government will spend big (with a capital B). The government’s new Work Choices advertisements have the potential to really bite with swinging voters. The government PR campaign will increase in intensity prior to the campaign proper.

Finally, Labor might just fall short because of the government’s campaigning for marginal seats. Labor might win 51 per cent, just as Kim Beazley did in 1998 and Andrew Peacock did in 1990, but lose in the marginal seats. When you look at the election from the bottom up rather than the top down, by examining individual seats within Labor’s range, there are several, such as Malcolm Turnbull’s Sydney seat of Wentworth and a couple of the seats in Western Australia, that look difficult for Labor to win. If Labor manages to lose three or four seats it is not likely to win overall.

Labor, importantly, is ahead with the bookmakers, suggesting that the public at large is becoming used to the possibility of a Labor victory. This will help Rudd’s prospects. I certainly didn’t expect Labor to be this far ahead in mid-August. But unlike some of my academic colleagues I remain on the fence. Changes of government are rare in Australian politics. We have only experienced five since World War II (1949, 1972, 1975, 1983, and 1996). I will be astounded if there is not a swing to Labor, but I don’t yet know whether it will be large enough for it to win office.

While this election is still there to be won or lost, Labor is rightfully the hot favourite. But John Howard was correct to point recently to the 1993 election as an example of what is always possible. On that occasion Paul Keating won the unwinnable election in similar circumstances. John Howard once described himself as "Lazarus with a triple bypass" for rising from the dead to reclaim the Liberal leadership. If he manages to escape defeat on this occasion his new nickname might well become Harry Houdini.

I believe that this conclusion holds even in the light of this week's story about Rudd's visit four years ago to the strip club in Manhattan. If Rudd is open and contrite, as he has been, then there will be no lasting damage to his reputation. The revelation may even serve to further humanise him in the eyes of many voters.

 



Comments

Comments should be short, respectful and on topic. Email is requested for identification purposes only.

Word Count: 0 (please limit to 200)

Submitted comments

After a decade of blatant government duplicity and prevarication, perhaps the electorate will finally say enough is enough.

David Dyer 23 August 2007

*Full disclosure: This article originally attributed the "Lazarus" comment to Paul Keating. It was in fact John Howard himself who made the comment, as the article now states. Thank you to the readers who have pointed this out.- James Massola, Assistant Editor.

James Massola 23 August 2007

Howard might win the election? You're frightening me. The man and his right-wing cohorts are out of control and riding roughshod over citizens' rights and privileges.
Australia is being led down the road to fascism.
Bring on any drover's dog of whatever colour and I will vote for it - I want Howard out so that we may all sleep soundly in our beds at night.
Go to: http://aclarencevalleyprotest.blogspot.com
and see what the Howard-Turnbull brand of arrogance is planning for the NSW Northern Rivers.

judith m melville 24 August 2007

How is Australia on the road to fascism? What a ridiculous comment to make. Frankly, the average Australian has never been better off. Go Johnny, you get my vote and there are still plenty of us out there who support the government as is!

Duncan 24 August 2007

Duncan implies that we can't be on the way to fascism because we have 'never been better off'. May I suggest that the latter does not preclude the former? Many fascist leaders have delivered material improvements for the 'average' citizen; consider Mussolini, Hitler, Tojo and assorted Latin American leaders. At the same time they created those frightening societies where the rule of law was replaced by arbitrary rule, fear, and the suppression of minorites. One might well say God help us if Howard and Ruddock and Abbott and the like get another three years of untramelled power. Citizenship will become meaningless, constitutional federalism will be replaced by arbitrary centralism, the deployment of the armed forces in internal affairs will be commonplace, the judiciary will become puppets, and the 'right' to vote will be even further restricted. We may, of course, be materially better off, but what a price to pay!

Warwick 28 August 2007

I was in Canada when the last federal election result was known. The reporter from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation summed up the Howard win on the news saying that Australians had voted with their hip pocket rather than on values. Let's not let it happen again.

Vince 30 August 2007

Similar articles

Iraq's Asia Cup victory hides reality of ungovernable society

5 Comments
Scott Stephens | 08 August 2007Iraq's Asia Cup victory hides reality of ungovernable societyThe press coverage of Iraq’s surprise victory in the Asian Cup final was — as Ernst Bloch might have put it — full of utopian sentiment. The win was, admittedly, a remarkable achievement, but one that hardly accounted for the sheer exuberance of the outpoured emotion that followed.


Polling whether politicians should go to heaven

13 Comments
Clive Hamilton | 08 August 2007Polling whether politicians should go to heavenThe results of the Australia's Institute's recent polling on the question reflect more than simple political judgments. While the Prime Minister seems to work hard at signalling his Christian beliefs, his moral standing appears tarnished by a widespread view that he is 'mean and tricky'. 


Lifelong friends at first sight

Chris Fotinopoulos | 08 August 2007Lifelong friends at first sightFriendship and family are invariably mentioned in the same breath. Although most parents expect their children to trust family ahead of friends, children tend to place greater faith in friends, who are more likely to ‘allow them to breathe’.


Politicians should not put people in jail

8 Comments
Brian Toohey | 25 July 2007Politicians should not put people in jailTerrorism involves the ancient crime of murder. Dr Mohamed Haneef is not charged with murdering anyone, nor involvement in any murder. The ministerial prerogative exercised by Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews should not exist.


Aboriginal child abuse: whom do you trust?

10 Comments
Brian McCoy | 25 July 2007Aboriginal child abuse: whom do you trust?We have learned that the damage caused by sexual abuse often continues for decades and into future generations. We can hope that Government interventions will make a long-term difference, but such complex issues cannot be reduced to a simple absolute: ‘the child must come first’.