By Mark Kenny

A version of this article was originally published by The Canberra Times.

In his rush to capitalise politically from selected elements of Donald Trump's mayhem, a still relatively unknown Peter Dutton has exposed gaps in his own presentation to voters.

Voids that not only deepen the mystery as to his suitability for high office, but suggest an ongoing internal battle between thoughts and words. Between what he believes, and what he believes he should say.

Is he a Trump-lite wannabe who would pull similar populist reins, as he has done already in launching war on public servants and wokists? Does he realise that most Australians are appalled by Trump's divisiveness and profoundly distrust the vulgar American?

Would he easily be manipulated by his bullish American senior, or is he a flinty mainstream conservative determined to vouch-safe Australian interests and global norms?

Would he draw Australia closer to a vengeful White House intent on bringing havoc and material damage to the global trading and security architecture, or be prepared to risk a bust-up with Washington through plain speaking?

To be fair, thinking voters will have variations of these questions for both leaders in the run-up to an election conducted against a backdrop of unprecedented global upheaval.

But as pretender to the throne, it is Dutton's portrait which is the least formed in the public mind. As I've noted before, the punchy Queenslander has never held a senior economic portfolio and never led his party through an election cycle.

This means that every action he proposes right now, he would undertake for the first time. Perhaps then, we should be guided by the views of those closer to him.

After all, he is pleading with the country to leap into the unknown. A risk his own party room ruled unthinkable as recently as 2018. That was when he peremptorily skewered Malcolm Turnbull's prime ministership. Liberal MPs at the time decided that a swerve from moderate Malcolm to Dutton's brand of hardline conservatism would never fly with voters.

A wounded Turnbull would later describe him in one word: "thug".

The contradictions of Dutton's promise are legion. On the one hand, he has praised Trump as "shrewd" and "a big thinker" but opposes the new 25 per cent mark-up on Australian steel and aluminium exports into the US. Where does he stand on Trump's galloping corruption, the flagrant conflicts of interest, the abuse of allies, denial of Congress, intimidation and neutering of the press, deportation of migrants, the toadying towards Putin and the President's plan for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza?

Dutton wants to rail against the tariffs as fundamentally wrong while also implying that his ideological/philosophical parallels with the President would have secured an Australian carve-out denied to every other nation.

Further, he apes a Trump-like methodology to explicitly boast he will get the tariffs lifted as PM. This of course, is unprovable, but again, it seeks simultaneously to leverage his toughness compared to Anthony Albanese through his oneness with Trump.

How would this play out in practice?

Would he seek to protect those metals industries - representing a tiny 0.2 per cent of exports - or husband his right-wing tribal commonalities with the Trump administration?

Dutton's refrain that Anthony Albanese lacks the strength to lead took a setback when the Prime Minister agreed to consider joining with European and other democracies to enforce any peace deal reached between Kyiv and Moscow.

Dutton argues that such a commitment on foreign soil is beyond Australia's remit. Yet he supported the disastrous Iraq mission when Simon Crean led his Labor opposition against it.

In any event, there is a palpable sense that had Albanese dismissed the initial invitation from Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron, citing Australian remoteness, Dutton would have depicted that as weakness, too.

Certainly, the respected former Army major general Mick Ryan is in no doubt as to the validity of a Ukrainian deployment, telling Radio National's Nick Bryant that an Australian contribution wouldn't merely support an invaded fellow democracy.

"It would be a statement, first and foremost, of our commitment to the security and prosperity of Europe, not just Ukraine ... Europe itself is very important to Australia economically and culturally," he said from Ukraine.

Ryan suggested the "huge" number of ADF personnel currently training Ukrainian soldiers in the UK could be moved to Western Ukraine to continue, and enhance, that vital role, among other possibilities.

Dutton's reflexive opposition was an instructive error of policy and of politics. It gives voters a hint as to how easily bipartisan national interests and core values can be weaponised by personal ambition.

It comes as the race tightens bringing greater scrutiny on the man who would be prime minister.

A YouGov poll released in recent days had Labor ahead on preferences 51-49 (albeit within the margin of error) for the first Labor lead in eight months. And it had the leaders level-pegging on net approval ratings of minus 6 per cent.

Equally interesting was Australian support for Trump at 31 per cent compared to Volodymyr Zelenskyy on 69.

Dutton has done well to be competitive in just one term, but his case for office remains too clever and daringly thin - a small target strategy in a world of big problems.

Mark Kenny is the Director of the ANU Australian Studies Institute and host of the Democracy Sausage podcast.