So I'm not the first, & won't be the last, to be irked by this. But anyway, here goes.

What Murph's reporting (& opining) on is a survey that showed, in a time of international crisis where Australia has performed relatively well, politicians benefit from a "competence dividend"

That's neither a surprise, nor something to be sneered at. But it's a one-paragraph story. It's what you'd expect to see.

The journalist's role, you'd think, would be to critically unpick that. Work through what premiers & the PM did to deserve it, or otherwise.

One case that could be made is that the premiers stepped up, acted visibly & decisively on behalf of their respective states, & the PM is largely riding on their coattails.

Murph, though, has been on a weird campaign to position Morrison in particular as a statesman-in-waiting.

Once the federal government authorised Job Seeker/Lover/Keeper, Murph was convinced this was (bound to be) the end of Ideological Warrior Morrison and we'd see the emergence of pragmatic Morrison who could govern reasonably, in ways atypical of the way his party had been trending

LOL

And LOL again.

The early economic interventions were made with a gun to his head. The idea he'd suddenly become a learning learner who learns was something Murph seemed desperate to hold on to, like it was important for her sense that federal politics could work properly.