Based on their record, does One Nation deserve our trust?
A WEEK from today we make our verdict on the performance of our incumbent state politicians and whether we think any of the contenders can do better.
The electorate is more volatile today than it possibly has ever been.
As a result, opinion polls can no longer be relied upon as an accurate gauge of the mood of voters.
Should Queensland return a Labor government or whether we are prepared to forgive and forget and give the LNP another go is something we won't really know until sometime next Saturday night - with any luck.
Whatever the result, we cannot afford to return a minority government that is afraid to make bold but necessary decisions, nor one which relies on support from an unruly rabble on the crossbench for survival.
Confidence outside of the Parliament is just as important (if not more so in some respects) as confidence on the floor of the House.
And what of One Nation?
Do they deserve our trust?
Do they deserve for us to consign the debacle of their last tilt at State Parliament to history?
Is it not folly to entrust balance of power to the unbalanced?
Is One Nation 2.0 the new improved version better equipped to handle the pressures than what we saw first time around? Surely we just cannot afford a second implosion.
From what I have seen of them to date, the signs disturb me: Sacking of candidates, removal of long-time supporters. The inability of the administration to tolerate criticism and scrutiny - the very things they attack traditional politics on.
Is One Nation 2.0 a more professional outfit than their first incarnation?
Should we not expect - no, demand - our political leaders, including those of One Nation, act in a more exemplary manner? To have the ability to prosecute an argument in a manner that is respectful of opposing positions in order to encourage healthy debate?
So, how mature is it for a political leader to make fun of another politician's physical appearance? That's school ground bully, Mean Girls stuff.
What sort of leader is Ms Hanson when she launches vitriolic personal attacks on her own previously loyal members when they refuse to do her absolute bidding?
I thought that party made a big thing about the independent thinking of its members... no? Not the actual case?
An old adage in politics is, "If you can't govern yourselves, why should the electorate trust you with government?"
The July 2016 federal election delivered upon us four One Nation senators. It's now November 2017 and they've managed to lose three of them.
To lose one could be regarded as unfortunate. To lose three is just plain incompetence.
One Nation relies heavily on attracting the disillusioned, the frustrated and the just plain angry. But that will only ever get you so far.
And they're not doing a great job at keeping members once the disillusioned, the frustrated and the angry start seeing how the party hierarchy behave. Which makes them no better than the traditional parties.
The fact that they peddle false hopes makes them worse. One Nation has demonstrated nothing in their recent conduct that warrants them being entrusted with our precious votes.
Pauline Hanson inserted herself into the Queensland election as if she was running for premier.
Given that it looks more than likely that her only current Queensland MP, Steve Dickson, looks like losing the seat of Buderim, I can understand why she wouldn't want the campaign focused too heavily on him as a party leader.
However, what will happen after November 25?
Will the One Nation MPs (if there are any) be allowed to act independently of HQ and appoint a leader themselves, or will Pauline's elite level demand to make that decision?
And how will that go down with the MPs?
I'm sure that many of the One Nation candidates are genuine people. But they're going to become pretty disillusioned pretty quickly once the realities of how the hierarchy do things hits home post-election.
Pauline's Battler Bus broke down last week. Perhaps we should take this as a most ominous metaphor.