KEY POINTS:
Is this deja vu or what? For the past decade or so, the dying days of the year have been consumed by drought, fire and the prospect of recession or the fall of John Howard.
The beginning of this holiday season is no different, either in conditions - tragic as they are, with fires and parched land - or speculation about the economic and political health of the nation.
But there is a difference. Going into an election year, there are real signs that Howard's 10 years as Prime Minister are more in danger of ending than ever before; and that the economy may be turning from friend to foe for the man who has reshaped Australia in his image during his reign as the country's second-longest-serving leader.
Normally, you could yawn, roll over with a good book and try to convince yourself that you really should have another dip in the pool. But the contest shaping up for 2007 really does have the potential to determine how life will be lived here for years to come.
Even Pauline Hanson, one-time leader of the now-defunct One Nation Party, has sniffed the wind and decided the time is ripe to dive back into politics.
Howard has survived (even thrived) through four elections by a combination of good luck, good management, darned good politics and a Labor Opposition that has excelled at destroying every opportunity that has been presented to it. Even given voter fatigue with the incumbency, there has not been a compelling case to vote the Government out.
If for no other reason, the economic reforms introduced by Labor and a subsequent run of good luck and good management have made Australia a comfortable place to live.
Nor have terrorism and the spectre of collapsing states in what strategists have described as Australia's arc of instability harmed Howard. Instead, he has turned it to his advantage by convincing Australians that only he can stave off disaster.
Polls have confirmed this: Howard's great strengths are economic management and national security.
The flip side, also confirmed in polls, are his great weaknesses. Labor is considered a better choice in areas such as social welfare, education and the environment.
This time round, and in the absence of some disastrous upheaval, Howard's politics of fear are a much diminished force. His recent efforts on social welfare, education and the environment have failed to convince many.
Industrial relations has become a millstone. So has Howard's unswerving support of the United States: The war in Iraq grows increasingly unpopular and, combined with other policies, is widely regarded as placing Australia much more at risk from terrorism.
As at the last election, Howard faces a new Labor leadership team. But unlike the unfortunate and doomed Mark Latham, he will contest the election against a Labor leader who, by and large, has the measure of Howard, is making real efforts to take the pulse of the nation and who, so far as can be judged, has the support of his party.
Kevin Rudd is an intelligent, determined opponent: His victory over predecessor Kim Beazley has already increased Labor's lead in the polls. He oozes values and - at last - he can point to economic pain inflicted on the suburbs by rising interest rates.
Although misquoted, the popular memory of Howard's pledge at the last election was that rates would not rise on his watch.
Rudd is relatively inexperienced - Howard is already launching the L-plate campaign that was so devastating to Latham - but he has time and circumstance on his side. The question is whether this is enough to defeat one of the most canny Prime Ministers in Australia's history.
But that's next year. And yes, I will take that dip. See ya.
