Howard-Again

Australians overwhelmingly voted Liberal-National, retaining Prime Minister John Howard. In what was widely seen as a referendum on Howard's steadfast alliance with America in particular, and aggressive anti-terrorism in general, the Prime Minister increased his (conservative) legislative majority to more than 30 seats. This is hugely significant for Bush, as the Belmont Club explains:

[I]n an election that he press predicted to be close, but which in fact turned out to be a rout. Not only did the opposition Labor Party fail to gain the 11 parliamentary seats they needed to win power, Howard actually increased his majority and may actually win control of the Australian Senate. Howard's opponent, Mark Latham, had hinted that he would re-think the Australian commitment to the War on Terror then retreated from that position under heavy political fire. Had Latham unseated Howard, Australia would almost certainly have scaled back its commitments to the US alliance. But Howard's win not only obviates this possibility, it also underscores the depleted nature of Leftist politics.

John Hillen at the Corner has more:

This is a very big deal, one that won’t make many headlines over here but is important for President Bush. Howard’s opponent ran on a Dean/Kerry type platform and really tested the Aussie electorate with an appeal to implicit anti-Americanism and explicit anti-Bushism.

Pat, at Kerry Haters, is more blunt:

This is a win for the coalition, a win for the President, and a win for the Australians. The losers are the backsliders, the folks who want to go back to chasing terrorists with subpoenas instead of killing them.

A great portent for Bush and model for U.S. voters. Especially because most Americans would rather get smashed with an Aussie than with a Frog.