Yes, Foxy...I think it's not helpful for Labor to be dragged back into the "we're gonna get back to surplus before you can" game also.

Considering the Coalition have offered almost nothing of substance so far this election campaign, Labor should just get on with their own agenda.

Regarding perceptions, yes you are right - they are important and probably the reason Labor has led or run even in the polls now for many weeks.

The perception being that Turnbull is a disappointment and not much more than a hot air factory.

Hi Foxy and Poirot, the New Matilda blog is spot on. Labor is being out maneuvered by the conservatives on who has the best economic credentials. Labor is going out of its way in trying to convince voters they too are good managers, their attempt to seek the holy grail of surplus by 2021 to match the Coalition is nothing, if not a distraction from the real bread and butter issues where the conservative are weak and most vulnerable, the issues of child care, health, education etc. The talk of 10 year plans is another needless distraction, which Labor should avoid.

Talking to voters the past two weeks, many non committed are saying "Turnbull, well he did promise us a new deal, but has not delivered on that promise." I feel that will cost the Coalition votes, but will not necessary be enough to get Labor home. Shorten is also perceived poorly by non committed voters.

This is not Labor's first mistake, but is its first major blunder.

Labor's first mistake was promising everything to everyone. This is selling to Labor's core socialist base, but the majority of voters are deeply concerned about the ongoing deficit crisis. To mollify the average voter Labor tried to sell a 10yr forecast instead of the usual 4 yr forecast simply because labor hoped to cover up its huge deficit in the short to medium term with fantasy "savings" in long term, and for a while this worked.

It was only a matter of time before the government called Labor out showing the $67bn deficit over the next 4 yrs, and what was worse, it was laid out in simple terms that Labor couldn't deny, and Labor slipped in the polls.

Labor's blunder was in its response. It first started back flipping on promises it had made to reverse gov spending cuts that were still on the ALP website, then making concessions on the savings it blocked in the senate (Showing that labor put politics before the country) and finally produced a silly document that everyone knows is a complete joke.

Labor's complete lack of fiscal credibility means that means that no one believes that no one believes that labor can or will even try to deliver the long term savings.

I am still undecided between the candidates.

It seems to me that investing in education and
training would be far more likely to deliver
productivity and growth and eventually a stronger economy
than a speculative give away to foreign multinationals.
At the same time I can also see the logic behind the
belief that if governments want to balance the federal
budget they will have to raise taxes and remove tax
concessions. Therein lies my conundrum. Who will be
best suited to govern this country? I really don't know.

Shadow, Chicken little Liberal and his the sky is falling nonsense about a horrendous deficit, when no such thing exists. Australia has a deficit, which is prudent at this time, and manageable. If the deficit was as horrendous as the deceitful government is claiming then why no Greek style austerity program, pension cuts. severe cuts to all areas of government expenditure, tax increases across the board.
To their shame the Coalition is unnecessarily trying to alarm the voters about the deficit, for no other reason than for political gain. This is nothing new with the conservatives, always playing the fear card, be it reds under the beds, to talk of horrendous deficits, and unfortunately many gullible Australians fall for this rubbish, and it often delivers the conservatives government.

Dear Paul,

The "fear card" is being played by both major parties.

Peter van Onselen writing for the Weekend Australian
(April 30th 2016) tells us that:

"Those in the know have long realised negative campaigning is
more effective than positive messaging..."

Seeing through the fear he states - is the challenge for voters.

van Onselen explains:

"Of course, away from the strategies of the parties and the
fear they hope to drum up, the real fear most people have is
that this election for the political professionals is their
chance to compete to retain (at least for
another term) - or attain power for its own sake,
rather than shape the nation for future prosperity."

No wonder many voters make their decision as to who to vote
for at the last minute. Seeing through the fear (as stated
earlier), is indeed a challenge for many voters.