Whenever you have a vote to decide something, the losers generally try to undermine and question the result, whether it be something like the EU Referendum result, or a more contentious issue like when work colleagues go for lunch and the one person who doesn't drink decides that they'd sooner admit to selling company property on eBay then have to split the bill evenly.

This takes us onto the topic of the recent election result in Zimbabwe which is being contested by the opposition, who in this case have also been the opposition for the past 37 years owing to the manner in which Robert Mugabe ran the country. I say unique, it's not terribly unique in that part of the world. The Zanu-PF ruling party has claimed a victory with 50.4% of the vote 50.4% of course being the same number as the daily rate of inflation there a few years ago as well as the expected number of years that the new president will likely serve, once he's had time to amend the constitution and destroy his political opponents with the sort of violent ferocity you'd more associate with Diane Abbot and a chocolate flapjack.

Going back to Zimbabwe though the main take-home for me was that if they had - as is alleged - rigged the vote then the opposition would likely have received 40% of the vote compared to Zanu-PF's 85% of the vote. As many a party spokesperson has said in that situation, stop thinking about the numbers, you'll only make your head hurt, especially once we've battered it in with a club in a government holding cell. At least you can be glad that if you're lucky enough to live in a rich western country then the worst you have put up with is the constant barrage of social media or the BBC and, actually, no, I'd frankly rather live in sub-Saharan Africa with no television then have to watch Neil Kinnock being interviewed about Brexit again.