Overtime, maternity leave, tax cuts – who said what, where, first and to whom?! Stop, stop, I’m begging you all – my brain hurts! Am I the only one who can’t seem to keep up with all these accusations and rebuttals whizzing by my head like bullets?

So, as a form of reprieve and to take a step back from the histrionics being played out on our televisions, I escape to that wonderful cyber world known as the “blogs”.

Forget those mass meetings with a disco beat, waving flags and chants that are trying to recreate the euphoria of elections past. If you want to know where the real campaign is being fought, it’s on the blogs, where you can read the thoughts of floating voters, who are, after all, the voters that matter. There, in the blog trenches with them, one finds the diehards (predominantly from the PN and AD camps) who are engaged in mostly intelligent verbal warfare as they post their respective arguments. Recently, however, the debate has turned ugly. It is scathing, often vicious and sometimes downright personal.

PN bloggers especially are throwing wild punches like a boxer who knows he is facing his final appearance in the ring.

Where are the Labour bloggers, you might ask? Good question. Perhaps they know they do not really need to enter into this particular fight, and are letting the other two scuffle between themselves instead.

Incidentally, some like to assume that Labour sympathisers never vote AD, but from the people I speak to, this is not quite correct. Many have migrated to AD because of its green credentials and its liberal ideology, which represents their views better than any other party. They have joined the former Nationalists who have turned their backs on the PN because they can’t get their head around the way it has embraced the arch conservative, religious right ideologies that sound so scarily like the Bible-bashing middle America that voted Bush in.

This belief by some people that they can pinpoint the precise demographic of any party allegiance ignores the fact that socio-economic lines, and hence political beliefs, have been blurred. Do you honestly think you can spot a “typical” Nationalist/Labour/

Alternattiva or even an Azzjoni Nazzjonali voter at a hundred paces? You’d be surprised. Just take a look at those over-enthusiastic Gonzi-chanting women in Qormi (with John Dalli looking like he wanted to die of embarrassment.) But I will concede that the majority of AD voters probably do come from a Nationalist background, and this will be confirmed when the cross party votes are analysed.

As if to confirm that the PN is seriously worried about AD taking a big chunk out of “its” electorate, we had the astounding statement by the Nationalist Party that it flatly refuses to consider any type of coalition with Alternattiva Demokratika. In short, it is saying: “Hey, you suckers, I mean um, voters, it’s either us or them. My way or the highway. Choose.” In effect, it is saying that not only does it want your Number ones but it is also trying to browbeat you to not exercise your fundamental right to give Numbers two, three and so on to anyone else, which is the essence (and beauty) of the single transferable vote. This is mind-boggling, coming from a party that has always championed democracy. We have been here before, of course: remember all those SMSs in 2004 not to give your Number two to AD?

I guess, contrary to its slogan, everything is not possible after all.

What has the PN to gain from pinning floating voters against the wall like that and giving them what amounts to an ultimatum? I doubt whether it has won itself any new admirers. For a start, it has thrown down the gauntlet and shown that it has lost its patience with those who a) refuse to vote or b) will vote for AD.

I’m no politician, but is it really very “smart” to piss voters off like that when – as we are often reminded – every single last vote is so very crucial. And here we are talking about voters who think for themselves and who rebel against being bullied, unlike those who don’t mind being led by the nose like the mass meeting crowds.

And now we have an AD councillor for Swieqi handing in his resignation from both his seat and the party. The wording of his letter echoes the same arguments put forward by Gonzi on why a coalition is out of the question. Of course, I’m 100 per cent sure there was absolutely no pressure exerted whatsoever.

As if.

How many times do I have to tell you?

That is simply not the Nationalists’ style at all.

* * *

My favourite breakfast show Bongu has been dealt a mighty blow.

On tuning in last Monday, I heard that from now on, Dr Frank Portelli (a regular guest who speaks on current affairs) would not be discussing any more politics and elections with presenter John Bundy (as if anyone is talking about anything else right now in this country!).

Using the same regulations it trots out every election year, the Broadcasting Authority has clamped down all PBS’ programmes, saying that topics and guests need to be approved beforehand, and for politics to be discussed there must be a representative from each political party.

Now from what I saw of Dr Portelli’s contributions, his comments were always fair and were serving a very good purpose by informing viewers on, for example, how the electoral system works. Those who didn’t agree with his opinion were free to phone, email or SMS their opinions, which were always aired. John Bundy, for his part, played the devil’s advocate, asking the questions that viewers wanted to ask. If the BA truly felt that equal airtime was not being given to all political views, perhaps it could have suggested that representatives be invited as guests on a one-to-one basis.

But to stop a morning show from having an impartial, civilised, WELL-

MANNERED political discussion, which reaches many female voters on the eve of an election, is bizarre to say the least. Especially when you see the alternatives being offered to us on prime time – slanging matches, the hurling of insults, four people talking at once and supposedly “unbiased” presenters who cannot restrain themselves from arguing with their own guests.

So, as from this week, John and Dr Portelli are “allowed” to speak about all other current affairs – except politics (which is similar to the absurd decision by di-ve.com to report all news, except politics).

This, in a country that lives and breathes politics, is passionate about its elections and is going to the polls in a few weeks’ time where there will be a 98 per cent turnout.

I personally think that by banning a fair, level-headed discussion such as this, the real losers are the thinking voters – the viewers that the BA is supposed to be “protecting” – the people who want facts and not

partisan drama.

* * *

And now, for some election humour.

Sorry, as I wipe my eyes, but I really can’t stop laughing – free light bulbs from GonziPN! When I first heard about this, and circulated the news to acquaint-ances, people thought I was joking. “What’s next?” a good friend asked, “Will Gonzi offer to baby-sit our kids? Nannu Gonzi! And where will we collect the light bulbs – from the ironmongery of our choice?”

My brother in Los Angeles pointed out that a similar energy-saving scheme has just been introduced there; of course, the difference is that Hillary Clinton did not promise the light bulbs as part of her election

campaign.

[email protected]