Most definitely, yes.

I think we’re both saying the same thing.

Would you at least agree that very little was done by the Nationalist Party to attract the 18-23 demographic?

Wrong again, I’m afraid. Cracking women are used as image-builders and not to attract hormonal youths or salivating old men like Philip Rizzo.

The message is: “Look at us; we are beautiful.”

In a mainstream political context, they are not used to the exclusion of cracking men.

The Labour Party used BOTH cracking young women and cracking young men in its image-building prior to 2013. Of course, it all depends on your definition of ‘cracking’. They were not my idea of cracking – the young men all looked like they should be propping up the bar in a seedy gay club in Rome and the women looked like escapees from a Beirut shopping mall; in other words, like looked like a bunch of hamalli avidly seeking social advancement- but they accurately reflected the tastes and preferences of the majority of the electorate.

No, I assume male voters in the 18-23 demographic are more likely to vote with their hormones than female voters. Labour’s images in the last election were overtly sexualised, and then it was for a male target audience. And they worked.

Besides, cracking men are in short supply in the youth sections of both parties. Cracking women are more easily found.

Women are the majority gender in this country.

I would never vote for the Nationalist Party on the grounds that it has ‘cracking birds’. I am quite clear on the matter that what it needs is some cracking men.

And so do the other lot.

Anyway, bampots often do and they make up for it by being aggressive and hateful.