The use of “Seinfeld” as a prefix in political jargon has become almost as annoyingly common as suffixing “gate” to scandals. The latest example is this weekend’s “Seinfeld convention” in Vancouver (christened as such because, with the golden boy being crowned without a vote, it is seen to be “a convention about nothing”).

This follows a barrage of headline double dipping, where every election over the past few years has been dubbed a “Seinfeld election” at one point or another. Here’s my beef with this:

1 – A “Seinfeld convention” sounds like a ton of fun! Giddy up! You’re telling me that a Seinfeld convention in Vancouver wouldn’t draw a packed house, generate tons of excitement, be a great time, yada yada yada. If you want to make it sound boring, maybe call it the “two and a half men convention” or something like that.

2 – Seinfeld wasn’t a show about nothing (not that there’s anything wrong with that!). You had more plot in a given episode than you’d ever get in Friends or Frasier. The “show about nothing” was in reference to a pilot Jerry and George wrote within the show. I don’t know about you, but I tend to think a bubble boy, dead fiances, some puffy shirts, a Soup Nazi, and beached whales would add a lot of excitement to an otherwise dull convention.

3 – It’s not creative. Sure, calling the 2004 Alberta election the “Kleinfeld Election” was kind of clever. Just like if Bill Gates was involved in a scandal, calling it Gates-gate might be cute. But it’s lazy to just toss “Seinfeld” in front of every election as an adjective and then act like you’re as witty as Larry David.

So let’s put a little more effort into it guys and quit the headline re-gifting. I fear we’re suffering from a case of creativity shrinkage here.