In short, there just isn't the broad community hunger for a change of government. Nor the anger. Voters are not waiting on their verandahs with baseball bats for Turnbull or even the Coalition. Such hinge-point elections do come along - think 1972, 1975, 1983, 1996, 2007 and 2013 - but this is not one of them. Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has labelled the scheme a scam. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen Betting markets confirm this with Labor drifting towards $5, and so too a welter of public polling. The respected pollster John Stirton has crunched the major survey data to discern the most accurate snap-shot of public sentiment. His conclusion, with the value of recent June polls, is that if anything, Labor has slipped behind fractionally since the end of May and is now trailing on national two-party-preferred, 49.2 per cent to 50.8. Whether this means Labor's impressive run has peaked ahead of polling day cannot be known yet, but that's what smart people in both camps suspect.

Remember, the ALP is chasing a steepish 4.4 per cent swing to snaffle the 21 seats it needs for 76. That's near enough to 51 per cent. Right now, it looks to be under 50 - even though in places it will be considerably higher. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. Credit:Andrew Meares Coalition haters will immediately dismiss this unpalatable conclusion, confusing it with their own barracking, but it is simply an objective reading of the available data. Their side is losing the argument in the court of public opinion. Assuming this holds and that Turnbull wins the election, he will no doubt claim his gamble was brilliant. But that would be spin. In truth, a reduced majority in the House of Representatives, and a Senate that is no more manageable as appears inevitable thanks to the lower quota, would be miserable return for his party, a frustrating result for the country, and a further blow to Turnbull's own party room authority.

Worse, it could unleash more political intrigue in Canberra. Worse, it could unleash more political intrigue in Canberra As for hopes by small-L liberals that a re-elected Turnbull would magically emerge to assert his progressive side, they would likely be dashed. Instead, Turnbull's preoccupation with placating party room reactionaries would become more intense, not less. Timidity would also rise. As a leader, Turnbull would be hostage to the same plunging polls he had used against Tony Abbott. Forestalling a mid-term ambush would mean keeping them high (a pointless vanity Rudd attempted also) and keeping his right wing assuaged making for yet another term in which internal politics would trump national interest governance. Which would raise the legitimate question. What was this double dissolution for?