Pauline Hanson's One Nation party has entered the political mainstream, a development that brings both new opportunities and significant challenges, according to political commentator Peter Van Onselen.
Recent Newspoll and Redbridge surveys indicate a minor decrease in One Nation's primary support, with some voters returning to established parties. However, this dip is not seen as a sign of the party's demise but rather a complex adjustment as voters begin to consider One Nation as a potential governing force.
Labor has seen a resurgence in its primary vote to 33 percent, partly attributed to government budget adjustments aimed at mitigating the impact of broken promises. The voters who are hesitating on One Nation are predominantly returning to Labor, bypassing the Coalition entirely. This trend is particularly detrimental to Opposition leader Angus Taylor, whose party remains stagnant at 17 percent primary support, barely ahead of the Greens. The analysis suggests that without the support of the Nationals, the Liberal Party may be struggling to maintain fourth place in primary vote.
The core question in Australian politics has shifted from whether One Nation poses a threat to the Coalition to whether it presents a genuine challenge to the governing Labor party. When a protest movement polls within striking distance of the government, it fundamentally alters the political center of gravity.
Populist movements often thrive on instinct and grievance, avoiding the complexities of policy development and budget balancing when governing is not a realistic prospect. This has changed for One Nation, as its growing support now invites greater scrutiny of the party and its leader.
Hanson's recent address at the National Press Club is described as a threshold moment, positioning her as the leader of a prospective governing force. This public platform demands a shift from simply being an outsider to presenting a more developed policy agenda. The same rhetoric that once sounded fresh can now raise concerns when voters are asked to imagine it as government policy.
One Nation's recent performance on issues like paid parental leave and monoculturalism has exposed the friction between protest politics and the demands of mainstream scrutiny. Despite these challenges, the party's support has not collapsed; it has merely returned to levels similar to Labor's primary vote a few weeks prior. This indicates a growing respect for Hanson's position as an unofficial opposition leader, a status that can no longer be dismissed lightly.
Commentators risk misinterpreting these poll fluctuations, potentially seeing them as signs of Hanson moderating or voters retreating as an election nears. However, the analysis cautions against underestimating Hanson's capacity for growth and assuming that temporary dips in support mean her movement has been definitively checked.
While One Nation poses an existential threat to the Liberal and National parties, it is less likely to pose the same threat to Labor's incumbency. In fact, One Nation's rise may increase the likelihood of a Labor re-election, as the party's greatest gains are expected in seats currently held by the Coalition. A fracturing on the right side of the political spectrum is not immediately conducive to unseating Labor.
The future trajectory for One Nation depends on Hanson's strategic calculations. If she attempts to soften her language and adopt the style of major party leaders, she risks alienating her base. Conversely, failing to make adjustments could mean she has already reached the zenith of her current support.
