Referendum, boomerang effect for the front No: the M5S and the government are strengthened

The day after the vote, just according to the numbers, what matters is that Yes to court of parliamentarians obtained 69.64%, that the final participation in the vote was 53.8% and that it was not unequal at the national level or at the head of the administrative vote, since the Front No in the conflict of attribution raised before the Query (and immediately rejected) to bury on Election Day.

the confirmatory referendum not only decreed a very clear affirmation of the Yes and a very evident reduction of the so-called return of the No, expected and inflated by propaganda to the unified newspapers of the national press and the transversal and unseemly contortions of politics terrified by the reduction of the seats that had voted almost unanimously, but also brilliantly exceeded the threshold of 50% plus 1 not required by the Constitution.

The fierce detractors of the reform to undermine the victory of the Yes can not even hold on to control, actually enough inconsistent, from a result derived from a small number of participants: among others, close to the vote, including a former Minister of Justice and former President of the Constitutional Court as Giovanni Maria Flick, invoking the absolute necessity and urgency of a constitutional reform for the introduction of the quorum in the confirmatory referendum.

Incredibly and with disdain for the truth the euphemistically colorful front of the No, and sadly in particular of left, to justify the artificial and often hypocritical reasons for the vigorous opposition to a minimal reform of simple adjustment of the number of elected representatives to the needs of alignment with other European countries and elementary functionality, has even gone so far as to compare it with the distortion that Renzi tried in 2016, omitting “the detail” that before the retouching of the two articles of the current reform, the Renzian write again of 45 articles and the suppression of the Senate reduced to a “chamber of the regions”.

Actually, in strictly political terms, something similar to what happened in 2016 – but with opposite sides and diametrically opposite results – also happened in this unique referendum campaign in which the letters have been mixed very often in bad faith.

If then, to make the constitutional referendum a plebiscite on his person and his leadership, inclining it to his contingent interests would have been Matteo renzi, now to impose it on the country and exploit it by any means to deal a fatal blow to M5S and irreversibly weakening the Conte government has provided the heterogeneous No team, moved by weak or inconsistent motivations at the constitutional level but strong and univocal although apparently irreconcilable in the political: the annihilation of the M5S.

The singular convergence for the No that has brought together people apparently on the antipodes of the public scene and that have made the referendum campaign a final showdown with the M5S and with Luigi Di Maio in particular.

There was a kind of ditto feeling that distinguished them Sardine and Saviano, respectively, expired in desolate banality and gratuitous vulgarity, moved by a visceral and unstoppable aversion to the pentastelas “impregnated with an authoritarian and xenophobic culture”, as well as the various newspaper masters and steam masters of each partisan parish, which along with the many longtime political sailors with multiple shirt changes still sit today threatened of the existence of the M5S in view of maintaining a power that cannot be scratched.

And when, in almost total solitude, the M5S and Di Maio had to put on their faces in a responsible and consistent way and go out to the streets to explain the reasons for the Yes apparently shared in Parliament in the last passage by all the parties, paradoxically, he accuses of wanting personalize the referendum. But the vast majority of voters did not take the bait.

The end result is that the launch of a common sense reform that collected cross-sectional petitions and proposals shared in words by everything that in the First Republic was called the constitutional arch and over which no political force could raise the flag has objectively become undeniable victory of the M5S, and has obtained the consent of millions of citizens who have been waiting for it for years and have also had the opportunity to realize the rate of credibility, reliability and consistency of its reference parts.

Regarding side effects: Conte that has been expressed clearly and repeatedly by the Yes comes out fortified, the stabilized government and too many grave-diggers ready for the M5S funeral should at least wait for the now (hopefully) next General states.