Whether they are will be tested in the focus groups. But the Prime Minister almost certainly didn't anticipate Australia Post's small-business stakeholders as well as some top-end-of-town voices would come out so strongly for Holgate. Many Post franchisees are furious over the attack - because the deal with three big banks for which the employees were rewarded propped up their businesses.

At the other end of the wealth spectrum Marcus Blackmore, major shareholder in the health empire where Holgate was preciously chief executive, told The Australian the way she'd been treated was "bloody disgusting".

Morrison also received a hiding from commentators including News Corp's Terry McCrann who labelled him an "outrageous misogynist".

Assuming Morrison didn't have some prior agenda against Holgate before the revelations about the watches at Senate estimates, he has put the government in a bind by acting on the spur of the moment. He's called an inquiry that will cost a deal more than the nearly $20,000 value of the gifts. On Thursday Holgate's lawyer weighed into the argument, which raises the spectre of an expensive legal fight.

Regardless of the inquiry's findings, Holgate's position is near impossible. Presumably she'll end up out of Australia Post, sparking a search for a new CEO when the business faces upheavals caused by COVID-19. In the unlikely event she remained, she'd be damaged and relations with the government beyond awkward.

On a very different front, the parliamentary motion moved by Labor this week to congratulate Victorians for overcoming the COVID-19 second wave is also a notable case study in the vagaries of reaction.

By far the strongest speech in the brief debate was from Treasurer Josh Frydenberg. A Victorian, he highlighted the costs of the lockdown and attacked the Andrews government, saying "it all comes back to the failures in hotel quarantine, for which we still do not have any answers".

The speech won both high praise and deep condemnation. Critics variously saw it as an assault against Victorians, the wrong tone on a day of celebration, and a distasteful exercise in politicking. The backlash revealed not just the sharp divisions over the Andrews government's COVID-19 handling, but also the intensity of feelings.

Only a misreading could portray Frydenberg's speech as an attack on the people of the state. His first line was: "The Victorian people have been magnificent"; what he said subsequently did not undermine that sentiment.

Whether negatives should have been put aside on such a positive day is a matter of opinion, but there wasn't anything confected about Frydenberg's sentiments. He has been genuinely angry for months about the state government's mistakes, highly cognisant of the economic damage but also concerned about the mental health implications. Where his speech was at fault was not in calling attention to the origin of the second wave, but in narrowing the blame for how it panned out.

The Andrews government - its quarantine bungle and its inadequate contact tracing - must absolutely wear blame. But the Morrison government must assume its share too. Most of the hundreds of deaths were in aged care, which comes under the federal government (intersecting with the state government, which is responsible for public health). The residential aged-care sector was simply not up to the task of protecting those living in it, as the royal commission has pointed out.

With Melbourne now entering (according to some retailers) an early Christmas mood as it comes out of lockdown, Andrews can expect to maintain for the immediate future the solid support he's enjoyed, mistakes notwithstanding. But there's a challenge ahead for him - to ensure there is not another wave, which means the Victorian health system needs to be (finally) up to scratch. On Thursday NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian, talking about when she might open her border to Victorians, said it would take a couple of weeks to test the robustness of that system.

Facing Saturday's election, Queensland Labor Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has been claiming her opponents would have left her state vulnerable to a second wave like Victoria's by opening the border.

The Queensland poll will be the first COVID-19 electoral test for a state government (we've had territory elections). Before COVID-19, the Palaszczuk government appeared in considerable trouble. During the pandemic, its chances improved substantially, with the border closure very popular. Recently, Labor has become more nervous. The Liberal National Party would have to win some nine seats in net terms for majority government. Labor would be pushed into minority government if it lost a net two seats.

Palaszczuk, who's been under attack from the federal government for months over her border, is using her record on COVID-19 as a very large crutch.

READ MORE:

Berejiklian this week said (unhelpfully for the LNP) that Queensland Opposition Leader Deb Frecklington "has been very open ... that she would have opened to NSW".

But it is notable this isn't Frecklington's current public line. She is assuring voters she'd rely on the health advice in determining border policy. Such is thought to be the political potency of COVID-19. And on Friday the Queensland chief health officer announced the border will remain shut to people from greater Sydney for at least another month (but opened to regional NSW).

If Labor suffers a serious knock in Queensland, the result will be interpreted as the likely beginning of the end for COVID-19's role as a protective vaccine for incumbents. If COVID-19 is seen to have shielded Palaszczuk, that will further embolden the states, which have become extremely assertive during the pandemic.