This is one of the hardest columns to write. The deadline for submitting copy is set at some early hour of Friday morning, well before election day and much before the tense vote-counting exercise of Sunday morning. This piece will be published on the day when everybody will be glued to their television sets, following the interminable process when the ballot boxes are opened (watch out for the deadpan voice describing the route the ballot boxes take up to the time they are finally upended) and stuffed into the pigeon holes of the different candidates.

Labour’s was a finely-honed battle plan. Style and media-wise it was close to perfect

At that point all eyes will be peeled, as everybody tries to interpret the facial expressions of the party officials. Is that furrow on Paul Borg Olivier’s forehead indicative of a negative result – or a photo finish? Is Jason Micallef’s swagger the confident walk of a conquering hero? Text messages will begin to ping furiously this way and that as news spreads of the celebratory fireworks let off a tad too early in some far-flung każin, or of how people have drawn closed their shutters and barricaded themselves inside as the marauding huns of rival parties take to the streets in carcades.

At the time of writing, all the surveys point to a Labour win. There is always the outside chance that a last-minute swing will produce a turn-up for the books, but it’s highly unlikely.

As the winning party is declared and attention turns on the new Cabinet and the soul-searching that accompanies defeat, it would be an interesting exercise to look at what the parties did right – in marketing terms – during this electoral campaign.

From the outset it was clear that Labour had a superior campaign in terms of strategy, preparedness and resources. There were none of the aimless billboards, needless attacks or carelessness which characterised the 2008 campaign.

Labour’s was a finely-honed battle plan. Style and media-wise it was close to perfect. The jury will be out for a very long time on whether Labour’s performance will be as impressive as its media campaign.

The one thing that stood out in the earlier stages of Labour’s campaign was its shift from a party-centred campaign to a less formal, less rigidly-defined ‘movement’. This could mean different things to different people, but the fact that it was so loosely-defined meant that even those who felt a shudder of distaste at being classified as being Labour, could easily slip into the movement.

It required much less commitment than being a card-carrying Labour supporter and having to take on the negative historical baggage of Old Labour.

The word ‘movement’ also has positive connotations of the civil rights movement and women’s liberation movement. So all the happy, smiling people who gravitated towards the movement could feel they were part of something bigger and more important than them.

This played up to a large part of the electorate who had begun to feel alienated and disconnected from the political class – increasingly being regarded as political overlords. After a long time of being preached to and told how to feel and vote – voters were being told they mattered. This chimed in perfectly with one of Joseph Muscat’s last appeals to be protagonists not spectators in the unfolding of the country’s future.

What’s more – the ‘movement’ counter-balanced – to some extent – the quasi-messianic cult-like persona that has been constructed around Joseph Muscat.

It was evident from the very beginning of the campaign that the cult of Joseph – as a welcoming, benevolent, non-divisive figure was being carefully built.

We had the publication of the Obama-like book and the joseph muscat.com website, which substituted the party website and which showed the intention of the marketing people. This was a take on the GonziPN concept where the leader loomed larger than life and overshadowed the party.

However, Muscat dropped the PL party appendix and assumed the heroic persona of people known only by their first name. Just like Elvis, Madonna and Beyonce, the movement had Joseph.

Although this adoration is already the topic of much amusement online (see ‘Joseph Muscat performs several miracles at final mass meeting’ on www.bisserjeta.com) as a marketing ploy, this creation of a hero-politician seems to work.

People crave a charismatic leader who can be the vessel of all their hopes and dreams and who they can look up to. It worked brilliantly with Lawrence Gonzi in 2008. However, as the subsequent unravelling of that particular political concept showed us, it is too great a responsibility for an individual to assume.

Even though the Muscat persona has been carefully constructed as being some parts Eddie Fenech Adami, with a good dose of Tony Blair and a touch of Barack Obama, there is little chance that this electoral vehicle will live up to all the good qualities of the paragons in the mix.

And when voters realise this, disillusionment sets in and we will have a repeat of the GonziPN meltdown. This, of course, begs the question as to whether voters will continue opting for the politics of personality (as opposed to policies and issues). For the time being it seems they will.

cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt