It was a chance for Julia Gillard to reconnect with the kind of voters who elected her 15 years ago — suburban Melburnians, the kind you might once have expected to be rusted-on Labor voters. And for that one crowded hour, there was a glimpse of how Labor can resonate in the Australian ‘burbs.

Last night’s second Sky News “people’s forum” — last week Tony Abbott faced a crowd of undecided voters in Geelong — was held in Nunawading, in the country’s second-most marginal seat of Deakin. It’s an electorate that looks likely to be swept away by an Abbott landslide if the polls are correct.

For those unfamiliar with Nunawading (as your Crikey correspondent was until 4pm yesterday), the Burvale Hotel lies at the city’s largest intersection, eight lanes of suped-up cars and station wagons, surrounded by eucalypts. Diagonally opposite, the “Asian Buffet” restaurant, a vision among miles of carpark. Across the road, the few visible buildings of an enormous business park. All around, hundreds of subdivisions. Australia.

Away in distant Twitter-land, the regular Gillard abuse continued: a liar, a thief, an awful person. There’s been plenty of negative coverage of her in the Herald Sun, which co-presented the Gillard forum. But in person, the effigy crumbled. There she was, mustard jacket and red hair, not some hated abstract notion, but a person like any other.

The mood at the Burvale Hotel was amiable. There was little or no hostility, and people seemed curious about meeting the PM. Older people dominated — about half the questioners were retired. Over the hour Gillard fielded questions on Gonski reforms, same-s-x marriage and the budget. Little new ground was covered. The carbon tax “lie” and asylum seekers were issues largely left untouched — with no criticism from the Right on these topics at all. For the most part, the cost of living did not feature.

Two questions were asked on same-s-x marriage. Bernard wanted to know why New Zealand had been able to legalise same-s-x marriage before Australia. Gillard said in NZ it had been passed by a conscience vote across party lines. University students asked questions on cuts made to tertiary funding to pay for Gonski; Gillard claimed it was not a cut but a decrease in the increase of uni funding.

Michael wanted to know when he’d see the long-promised, now abandoned, budget surplus. Gillard said revenue was down and cutting too far would hurt people and the economy. Host David Speers questioned her on cutting the compensation packages promised as part of the carbon and mining taxes. “We said they’d get [the compensation] and they will,” the PM responded.

Rob, a retired engineer, asked why Labor’s achievements hadn’t had proper publicity. He made a joke about the footy. Gillard made a joke about the footy and avoided the free pass she’d been handed to complain about the media. Another Michael wanted to know why expensive mandatory detention of asylum seekers wasn’t being wound back.

“Gillard managed what has seemed to elude her of late: being a real person.”

Stay-at-home mum Sharon wanted to know what the government’s plans on schools were, which was answered like the Dorothy Dixer it was. Retired engineer Graham wanted a guarantee that the Catholic school his grandchildren attended would not be worse off under Gonski. He said he’d like to vote ALP if that guarantee was made. Gillard said all schools would see an increase in funding, some more than others. Graham remained unconvinced.

This question highlighted a particular problem for the Gillard government as it heads toward the election. Have voters simply switched off? Here was a specific issue Graham cared about, so much so his support for Labor hinged on it. But even with an acceptable answer (and indeed that is what the Gonski reform would do), he was unconvinced. Gillard-as-a-concept and Gillard-as-a-person had met up at Nunawading — and the result appeared to be a long shrug from voters.

It wasn’t the supposedly hot-button issues of the week like Gonski that got the most reaction from the crowd. There was applause at a question on foreign ownership of agricultural land from a reader of Tim Flannery’s essay on food security. Gillard told the audience they had nothing to fear. “We like investment in this country,” she said, perhaps sensing a convenient issue with which to wedge the Coalition’s free-market and protectionist elements. But no direct mention was made of Abbott, no rousing attack on his policies (or lack thereof).

Foster-carer Jodie had questions about the tax status of faith-based organisations. She was concerned the government was going to strip some churches of their exemptions. There was nothing to fear there either, said Gillard.

Two unexpected questions from the Left flank were asked. George, a retired teacher, offered to pay more tax on his superannuation. “I’m a socialist at heart,” he told a clearly bemused Gillard. She declined.

Donna complained about continuing live animal exports. Gillard talked about “the right balance” and how the government was “balancing interests” and “balancing safety with pragmatism”. Donna did not seem pleased by all this “balance”. Another question for ALP strategists perhaps: is Gillard balancing her way out of re-election? The government’s “balanced” approach didn’t seem to please either side at the Nunawading pub — in fact, it did the opposite. It seemed to frustrate the Right and the Left, rather than win over voters at the centre.

The forum ended as it started — amiably. Gillard managed what has seemed to elude her of late: being a real person. The results? Ninety members of the audience voted afterwards; 40 said Gillard had won their vote, 38 were undecided, 12 said she hadn’t.

Crikey asked people what they thought too. One man said Gillard was at the “platitudes layer, not the complexities layer”. Others said she had shored up their support. Someone said he’d not vote for Labor, but had more respect for her.

Now all Gillard has to do is personally meet all 22,999,900 Australians. Maybe then Labor will be in with a fighting chance come September 14.