Advertisement
The Maltese Herald
APS : 0.57 AXR : 0.41 BMIT : 0.35 BOV : 1.74 CVS : 1.00 FIM : 0.16 GHM : 0.87 GO : 2.70 HLI : 0.23 HRV : 0.97 HSB : 1.36 IHI : 0.45 LOM : 0.80 LQS : 0.19 LSI : 0.49 LSR : 1.00 MDI : 0.25 MDS : 0.45 MIA : 5.95 MLT : 0.55 MMS : 1.32 MPC : 0.35 MSC : 0.33 MTP : 0.47 MZ : 0.58 PG : 1.89 PZC : 0.63 RS2 : 0.52 RS2P : 0.60 SFC : 6.70 STS : 1.25 TML : 1.00 TRI : 1.12 VBL : 0.20
Culture News Sports
The Maltese Herald

It doesn’t look good for alternative candidates

—

by

Mark Camilleri
in

If voting patterns are consistent with the 2019 election bar some differences with Robert Metsola getting more votes, it is the Nationalist Party that will be making significant gains in this election and not alternative candidates. As I wrote earlier, independent candidates like Arnold Cassola (although he will surely be getting a better result from 2019), have made a gross error of judgment in splitting the vote with ADPD. A stronger result would have been achieved if these principled and good-willing candidates joined forces instead of running their own separate and distinct popularity campaign against each other.

Comments

  1. Joseph fenech avatar
    Joseph fenech

    I do hope pn will get three seats. With two they did wonders, with three they will do super wonders.

    Reply
  2. Banquo avatar
    Banquo

    Let us make one thing clear. Labour have lost the European Parliament elections. What matters in any parliamentary election is the number of seats. If the Malta Labour Party had four seats between 2019 and 2024 and they will have three seats between this year and the next election, then they objectively lost.

    Moreover, the members of the Labour Party will sit with the Party of European Socialists, which will likely have fewer seats than the European People’s Party (the group that the Nationalist Party MEPs sit with), not to mention the hard right MEPs who will probably be more numerous than ever. Therefore, objectively Labour have lost twice over. This comment is not related to a moral victory of reducing a 40,000 vote deficit to a 15,000 one. This is just cold, parliamentary logic.

    Robert Abela, meanwhile, is trying to capture a winning narrative before word seeps out that Labour have lost. He relies on people’s ignorance about how parliaments and EU institutions work to do this. Hardcore Labourites will believe him and go out to celebrate, thereby reinforcing the narrative.

    We have been here before. In 2003, Alfred Sant created an alternative reality in which partnership with the EU had won over membership of the EU. Eventually, though, Labour had to face the fact that they had lost. Is anybody in Labour today realistic enough to acknowledge the parliamentary facts? And is the media concomitant enough of the issues to avoid simply repeating Labour’s narrative?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *