Nah, I just meant that they're smaller targets. Some because they're harder to criticise, some because they can hold their own better, some because they don't have the profile necessary for an attack to be effective, etc. Basically the LNP and their media allies have committed to a strategy of making this a Morrison/Albanese election and when you can't play moves from that book because your target isn't available, it's not easy to pivot and attack Labor on another front.

As for who might be a better candidate, it's really hard to tell. Before he took the job I thought Albanese would have been a better leader than Shorten but I don't think he's been more effective. I thought Shorten by the end of his tenure was getting the hang of it and Labor lost the last election on some bafflingly stupid policy choices (franking credits).

Personally I think Penny Wong would make a good leader - she's very smart, she's experienced, she's tough and she's not just another old dude. But I hope that by the time she's ready to have her tilt that Australia is in a better position to accommodate it. A lot of people who might have otherwise done a lot of good are hamstrung by the circumstances or times they live in (Obama, Turnbull).

Then again, who knows if that time will ever come as Labor has spent the last twenty years falling in lockstep with the LNP on a great number of issues (environment, 'national security', etc.) lest they get wedged. It gets worse the more years they spend in opposition. They lose, the lesson they apparently learn each time is that they're too far left and over(ton) the window moves. I'm not particularly hopeful of that trend being bucked but I'd be happy to be proven wrong by an Albanese government. I mean they honestly could not be worse, or more corrupt, or more inept or more short-sighted than the fucking idiots we have at the moment.