Howard was seen as "sneaky & tricky", while Rudd was "calm & visionary". As the heat is turned up in the Democratic Primary, the same perceptions seem to be at play.
Today was probably the worst day for the Clinton campaign, with headlines like "Clinton official says Obama's past drug use could hurt him", and no matter how far Hillary distances herself from the smear, no one believes she didn’t direct it.
Hillary came into the campaign as a "Washington Insider", and with so many Americans wishing for real political change in America; her ability to affect that with money from the same old lobbies in the beltway was always her greatest strength and weakness.
As the poll results of New Hampshire came in, a state that Hillary should clearly be leading in, everyone thought "Now the real Hillary will come out", and the attack's didn't take long to start "leaking out".
In the Australian election Howard tried a very similar trick, of distancing himself, but allowing smears of Labor's team to be aired, and dispite how many times he said "we don't have a smear machine or team", no one believed him.
Hillary is in the same boat, even if she isn't behind the Obama smear, no one will believe her, all Barack need do is keep to his guns, continue the message that to change Washington you need "Fresh Ideas". And he naturally looks fresh, just like a fresh faced Rudd who won the Australian election with little difference in policy from Howard.
If the Clinton campaign can't look positive and avoid smear, then Obama is already the next Democratic Nominee. Does anyone think the Clinton campaign is disciplined enough to reign in the smears, Howard's wasn't!