However, I don’t buy the whole “balancing state and federal governments” argument. States have political cycles of their own which are substantially independent of federal swings of the pendulum. In Queensland, changes of government are very rare, with only six since 1915. That might give you some idea of why Peter Beattie hung on in 2006 when by rights (and he knew it) he should have lost. And the LNP is still looking quite messy. Aside from the internal shenanigans associated with the Nats takeover, Lawrence Springborg has made a couple of big mistakes by not following up on his teaser campaign with any substantial policy in areas such as infrastructure, health and education and by going relatively silent since his great conservative union was kinda consummated. The Borg is now back in a no policy, carping oppo leader zone – with internal rumblings. So I think 2009 in Queensland is still Labor’s to lose.

Incidentally, contra The Australian, I don’t think Kevin Rudd should be shaking in his boots at Labor’s state polling in Queensland. The ALP won a majority of federal seats under Bob Hawke in the state while Joh Bjelke-Petersen was Premier in both 1983 and 1987.

Elsewhere: Possum crunches the numbers:

Beware people, or rather Queensland Nats, saying that The Merger is responsible for this changing of political fortune – as you can clearly see from the timeline, Bligh becoming Premier is what seems to be driving most of this, with Labor falling sharply and the Conservative party vote increasing substantially before the merger occurred. Springborg’s Better Premier rating is in the bin, again, as it probably always will be – the bloke is a liability in metro seats.