As always, Don, an interesting article. I take a slightly different tack on a couple of things, but I do agree that the piece in The Conversation was facile and fairly puerile. It's a shame that such a great idea is not producing the results it deserves to. The main reason for that, it seems to me is the recycling of hacks who have an historical association with the "progressive" side of the media divide, talented as they may be as writers.

It is to be hoped they can lift their game over time.

Now, the things I differ on. The issue of leadership change is a red herring, it seems to me. It distracts from the very real reforms that are occurring in the ALP. It's highly instructive that the main critiques of Rudd are all about personality and the fact that some of the least impressive former Cabinet Ministers (red-underpants Conroy the superannuation clerk and JEG's boyfriend Emerson being least among equals there)have refused to work with him. From where I sit that's an endorsement! It's also a sign of maturity to acknowledge and rectify errors of judgement, such as putting JEG into the job.

I also disagree that Rudd has tried to make it a Presidential campaign. That has been done by the simplistic media who like a good conflict-narrative because it's easy to write. Rudd does have a lot of personal support and it makes sense to draw a line between the Gillard debacle and the Rudd resurrection, but there has been a lot of good policy as well. The fact that the "Outs" are not arguing against a great deal of the policy is an indication that there is broad agreement on what needs to be done, whoever is in the hotseat.

A disclosure is in order here. I am in Rudd's electorate and I volunteer, albeit sporadically, to assist his re-election. however, I don't think it makes a jot of difference whether Kev or Tony becomes PM after the election. The politics is disengaged from the policy and perhaps that's the ideal situation?

I don't think it makes a jot of difference whether Kev or Tony becomes PM after the election.
Antisceptic,
If you think that there's no difference in the level of competence between those two then you'd better crawl back into your little hole. It is an insult to Abbott to put him on the same level as Rudd as it is indeed an insult to decent people to put them on the same level as ALP supporters.
Yes all the indoctrinated young voters with their iPhones are are a democratic force to be reckoned with but sadly idealism is what got Australia to the sad state it is in now. Tripple AAA rating ?, more like triple HAAA ! If the Rudd Administration is so good then why are the coffers empty ? If they are so good why has local manufacturing literally ceased ?
I suggest you give those not in the public service some thought.

My Mum always used to say that some people are brought up, some people are dragged up and some people are kicked out of bed and told to get up.

She forgot to mention those who got out on the wrong side...

Yes Antiseptic, & some are so thick they are still in bed, & asleep.

Only those so indoctrinated they can no longer see, & those who have been asleep in bed or out for the last 6 years, could consider voting for Rudd.

Anyone who ever sees him on TV & can still vote for him, must be deranged, or getting something out of it.

Thanks Hasbeen, was there a point to that, or were you simply trying to demonstrate that you're not interested in thinking about issues as long as you have a team to barrack for?

Hasbeen: ".. but why not bring back Fraser to be joint PM. He never was much good, rather like Whitlam actually, & has gone further to the dark side since. Together they should be able to do almost as much damage as Julia & the KRudd. "

Fraser has gone to the dark side. He has become a Greens sympathiser.

You are on safe ground ranking Julia and Kevin as being worse than Whitlam. At least Whitlam had some principles.