Fasten your seat belt, this 'car' can go from 0 to 87...

Election rhetoric has been shifting into higher gear ahead of Nomination Day, tomorrow (27 April). And even more high-octane metaphors are being pumped out by political parties.

There's one about driving a car -- and the political context of its component parts.

WP chief Low Thia Khiang declared on Sunday that a strong opposition can be a "spare tyre" in case there is a puncture . A puncture presumably means some kind of failure by the incumbent government, ranging from perhaps a policy boo-boo (nail in the tyre) to a major blow-out (maybe even all four tyres ripping apart).

I thought this unfortunate analogy would be seized upon by the PAP. After all, the spare tyre is unsexy, is out of sight... it can even be dispensed with! My little hatchback car does not come with a spare tyre. The car maker kindly gave me a kit to inject something into a tyre if it were to be punctured (touch wood!) so that the vehicle can hobble to the nearest garage.

And the latest tyre technology is called "run-flat" -- tyres can be made so robust that even a puncture will not prevent the car from reaching a garage without having to stop. So, think about it. If a political party were to use the spare tyre as its party symbol, it'll surely sputter.

But did the PAP seize its chance? No. Instead, the PAP's K. Shanmugam said the WP -- instead of wanting to be just a spare tyre locked up in the car boot -- wanted to be a "co-driver" and to tussle with the PAP over the steering wheel. He added that the WP wanted to be seated next to the driver (the PAP) so that it (the WP) can "stop the car if he [Low] does not agree with the direction".

I don't get this analogy either. A car has a driver and it has passengers. At most, it has "backseat drivers" (MPs from both sides of the floor?). A car can't have a co-driver.

A "co-pilot" -- using the aeroplane analogy -- would make more sense. A co-pilot has his own set of controls. Stretching this metaphor, the co-pilot is a coalition partner, something unimaginable about the PAP's need for one now or in the far future. So I can't imagine Mr Shanmugam using this analogy.

To go off-track a little, old-timers like me will recall that there were once specially configured Morris Minor cars (remember the Lambert driving school?) with two sets of controls (I can't remember if there was a second steering wheel). With such cars, the driving instructor could override the actions of the learner driver (the "lembu") if a dangerous move was about to occur.

But, again, I think no one is alluding to a car with two sets of controls.

So, both analogies -- the spare tyre and the co-driver -- suck. They should think of better metaphors to convey their respective arguments. Fasten your seat beats, you're going to meet more metaphors -- clever or otherwise -- enroute to May 7.