The election campaign has now entered a different phase.
The manifestos have been published, the major proposals are already known, and both major parties are now spending more time trying to convince undecided voters why the other side should not govern.
That was evident this week when Prime Minister Robert Abela warned that people who choose not to vote could "open the door to Castille" for the PN.
It was an interesting line of attack, particularly because it was aimed less at loyal Labour voters and more at those considering abstaining altogether.
Rather than simply encouraging participation as a democratic duty, the message effectively framed abstention as a risk - that by staying home, voters could unintentionally help bring a Nationalist government to power.
This is not new in politics, and election campaigns have long relied on fear as much as hope.
Labour warns voters against instability, austerity or inexperienced leadership. The PN warns voters against abuse of power and nepotism.
Both sides attempt to persuade the electorate not only by promoting themselves, but also by convincing people that the alternative would be worse for the country.
Still, Abela's wording stood out because it showed where Labour increasingly believes the real electoral battle now lies.
The party is no longer only trying to energise its traditional base. It is also trying to prevent voter apathy, particularly among people who may feel politically detached.
The Prime Minister linked that argument to international instability, wars and economic uncertainty, insisting Malta needs experienced leadership capable of "driving the economic engine."
The underlying message was clear: this is not the moment for experimentation or protest votes.
Politically, it is understandable. Labour's strongest electoral weapon over recent years has been its image of economic stability, particularly during crises such as Covid-19, inflation and energy shocks.
Much of the campaign has therefore revolved around competence, continuity and reassurance. The repeated emphasis on experience is designed to remind voters that uncertainty abroad should make them cautious at home.
The remarks also reflected how election campaigns evolve once the major proposals have already been placed on the table.
At this stage, parties are not only trying to convince voters with manifestos and promises, but are increasingly focused on turnout and voter participation itself.
With both major parties having already unveiled their plans for the country, the campaign is now shifting more towards persuasion at a personal level - convincing non-voters to actually cast their vote.
What the remarks perhaps reflected more than anything is an understanding that a section of the electorate remains undecided, unconvinced or emotionally detached from the campaign altogether. After weeks of rallies, slogans and proposals, there are voters who still do not feel strongly pulled in either direction.
Appealing directly to those people is therefore becoming increasingly important in the final stretch of the campaign, by attempting to frame the consequences of staying home on 30 May.
Whether one agrees with the message or not, it showed how campaigns often become more psychologically focused in their final days.
By this stage, most voters already know the proposals being offered. The battle instead becomes about emotion, urgency and convincing people that their vote - or lack of it - could genuinely shape the country's direction for the next five years.