Enamored by his own reflection

There’s an old Aesop’s fable my father used to always tell me

A dog was crossing a plank bridge over a stream with a piece of meat in his mouth, when he happened to see his own reflection in the water.  He thought it was another dog with a piece of meat twice as big; so he let go his own, and flew at the other dog to get the other piece.  But, of course, all that happened was hat he got neither; for one was only a reflection, and the other was carried away by the current.

The talk of a snap election reminds me of this fable.  The PLP could do more to damage their position than strengthen it by calling a snap election.  What it comes down to is that while polls suggest PLP supporters may not be fed up with the PLP, they’re fed up with Premier Brown.  A snap election could easily be viewed as an unnecessary power grab by Premier Brown when he has been claiming for some time his intention to step down in 2010.  Would we need to again ask if he intends to mislead us?

A snap election could go two ways.  One, the UBP and newBP could face off against each other for the newBP’s seats, thus pulling what few candidates they have away from other seats in a bid to sacrifice the win in favor of the same inner squabbling that crippled the party in the first place.  The second possibility is for the UBP to not challenge the newBP and focus on winning PLP held marginal's.  This would be damaging to the newBP in that it would make it even harder to differentiate themselves from the UBP, but would give them a decent shot at staying in existence as a third party. 

PLP supporters could believe that the PLP is guaranteed to win regardless because of the fragmented opposition and choose this as a time to show their disappointment with Premier Brown by not turning out.  A weak turnout thus making it harder for the PLP to hold onto their marginals.  Could a snap election be much like that dog enamored with his reflection; Where the greed of having more causes one to lose all?

Comments

[Sal]

if they vote themselves onto the EB plantation yet again, they deserve what they'll get !

The beatings will continue until the morale improves.

[Ken]

I think its important to note that the Premier has not said anything to lead anyone to believe that he is going to call a snap election. yes he did say he is watching things develop and will do what he feels best (i am paraphrasing) but any leader would say that. he doesn't have to let us know what is going to happen, and as the leader has every right to call one if he so desires. I do think, however, we should note that most of this discussion in the paper about a snap election has come from people that the RG have deemed political experts, largely because they stand opposed to the PLP or Dr Brown, not because they have any positions that would deem them privy to any information that could persuade them that a snap election is imminent.

[Rummy]

Breaking News.....The President of the United States of America has called an election on October 31st.

The RG reports that Ken, their informant says that the RG stands opposed to the PLP and Dr. Brown.

Yah gotta love this stuff. Really......

The only thing "Snap" would be an erection......and we can't seem to get anything up to par these days..........................

[Denis]

Ken,

I don't think it matters whether the Premier said he would or wouldn't call a snap election. As we've seen in the past, he will willingly say one thing and do another in the interest of what he feels best so he could be outright denying it and it wouldn't matter.

My argument is that a snap election would be a bad idea for both Brown and the PLP. Others have made similar arguments. To suggest that such arguments are elements of Brown/PLP opposition doesn't make a whole lot of sense. If that was the case you'd see people finding ways to wholly encourage it if they believed it would damage Brown and the PLP.

[Ken]

Denis - this isnt necessary a matter of saying one thing and doing another...it wouldnt be politically expedient to let everyone know what he is going to do.

my point was that the only people in the media that are being interviewed that are pretending to be political experts are charles jeffers and larry burchall, both who are not PLP members and dont particularly have much affection for the Premier so their views are both jaded and uninformed. they know not of what they speak, yet they profess to be an expert. Larry burchall may have played a role in the '98 election but he has had little to do with the party since then.

[Denis]

Ken,

Understood. The thing with the media is that they're out to sell papers and controversial issues sell papers. They'll get the closest person to the issue they can to comment but won't hold back if no official party people are willing to publicly comment.

I'm sure if present MPs or party execs had been willing to comment publicly their comments would have been published. My suspicion is that none were willing to speak.

If Jeffers and Burchall have opinions they'd like to express, I find no issue in allowing them to express them. If current PLP representatives have no interest in sharing their side of things, then so be it, but by remaining silent they accept that others will be given higher prominence.

As you suggested, the decision is ultimately up to the Premier so any discussions at this point are purely speculative. I believe most people appreciate that.