Editorial

Answering ‘why’ As chips came down for the final round of the most spectacular fight yet in our political arena, two things became abundantly clear. One, earlier rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding, the incumbents were willing to say or do anything – from consenting to strange bedfellows to rewriting the terms of endearment with their partners and allies – that they believed could help them survive the no-trust motion, and failing that, have a fighting chance in the next race for power and public offices. Two, in answering why the National Assembly members and by extension the voters at large should keep faith with the prime minister and his team, the appeal was clearly to sentiments rather than reason and the argument about intentions, not performance.