It was exactly four years ago, 13 December 2002. Super One was broadcasting the now usual fund-raising marathon, with many people giving what little they could, while on the other channels the zapping population of Malta could watch Eddie Fenech Adami basking in EU glory at the summit in Copenhagen that decided the funds to be given to the newly acceding countries, including Malta.

It proved to be a defining moment, so much so that the Labour leadership was forced to retreat to the now customary playing around with figures and arguing, till time proved it wrong, that Malta would be given only a marginal Lm1 million increase.

Four years on, last Wednesday saw the same contrast. One would have thought people would have learnt something since then.

Let us not focus on the money that was collected, since both sides have battered that argument to death.

See what the couch potatoes, sitting and zapping away, must have seen and compared, since the couch potatoes make up the country’s swinging voters.

On the one hand they saw a very drab show put up by One TV, including a tent set up in the street and improvisation all the way, not just in what was put on but also in the order of events. The colour was bad, and the singers and actors a motley crew, with some good names and also some very mediocre amateurs.

On the other hand, the NET people cannily stayed indoors, in a proper studio with proper lighting, mostly with proper singers and with verve.

The result was a flood of money coming in. Now Labour would, and it does, argue that this could be coming from the contractors who are being given a piece of the cake by the Nationalist government, and who could gainsay that? But it could equally be true that people were attracted by a glittering, dazzling show and put off by a drab one.

More: the people in the NET studio were mostly ordinary people but they were happy to identify themselves with a party supposedly fearful that it will definitely lose the coming election, an electoral basis that was supposed to have turned against a non-delivering government.

The people at the former Radio City Hall were – well, what Labour crowds have been through living history – and in fact most of them have been there all through, ageing over the years.

From what could be perceived through continuous zapping, the perception crept through that Labour is once again appealing to its core voters, whose faces bore a great resemblance to the faces one could see at Radio City.

That section of the electorate is convinced it will win, that it has to win, that it is its turn to win – as if there is such a thing in politics. It is aided and abetted by some of the party’s front bench, which strutted and preened as if they are already ministers and will change Malta in no time at all.

And underscoring all this was the most worrying and chilling undertone – revealed by a party supporter from hospital – that the party in government will see to all those who feel they have been treated unfairly and will punish those who were responsible. Shades of things being upturned and revenge acted out that was not even nipped in the bud by the many personalities there.

As to the crowd on the other side of Pieta, it did verge from the fawning to the simplistic, from the fundamentalist to the people there for the party mood, but at no time was there any evidence of any sinister undertone.

The question recently asked: if “these” people would be ready to step down, has to be countered with a logically linked question: will “those” people (referring to the other side) accept a defeat?

As a possible reply, there was once again the usual playing around with figures, such as we saw post-Copenhagen and also post-EU referendum. This time it was far more innocuous: bunching together four days of collection and massing them against one day of collection, then hedging the bet by saying that, anyway, it is far better to have a little from the many than a lot from the few.

It is simply far too early to try and draw some conclusions from a day of fund-raising, but far more important than just what amount of funds was collected is the view that each party gave, willy-nilly, of itself and of its core supporters. Beyond the words and beyond the slogans and manifestos, what people think of the party’s core is essential in any close-run election such as ours.