& thats just to have the most seats, to win a real victory (a majority) they need a staggering lead of AT LEAST 8%.
What I would love to happen is the repeal of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 (which got roundly criticized in the Commons last week) so that we would be able to have such an early election. As it stands such an early dissolution would not be able to happen.
I honestly have no idea. The Lib Dems don’t seem to be doing at all well in their core constituencies, and they’ve utterly lost the “protest vote.” If they retain a few MPs it will be because they were really good MPs for years past; nobody new will get in.
Labour do need a new leader. I remember this being said when I was a kid, with Neil Kinnock - that they were intentionally putting up a weak leader against a weak parliament, so that the next one would really work. Like innoculation.
Agreed. It’s appalling that such an act was put into practice during a hung parliament.
Why is that bad?
I agree and for the record, I’m assuming in my scenario that either the act is repealed or that whoever is forming the government deliberately engineers losing a vote of no confidence. I’m pretty sure that any hung parliament this time will act to repeal it, or at least amend it.
Alternatively they could just drag out the negotiations for long enough to change leader(s) and then admit defeat when no party has enough backing to pass the Queen’s speech – I’m not sure what’s the maximum amount of time that could go on for.
Nobody really has an appetite for coalition this time round – everyone saw what happen to the Lib Dems after they agreed to help the Tories. Labor seem determined to go it alone rather than water down their principals. No-one will join with UKIP because of the hit to their core vote (although I can see that changing if UKIP have dozens of seats). A minority parliament could easily be forced out in the second session if the rest of the house felt it was worth it – and they’d have a justification to the public if a lot of party leaders had changed over that time.
I think the idea of coalition was initially popular but the experience of the last five years has soured many Brits to the idea. Mark Oaten’s book Coalition warned of the dangers of coalitions for smaller parties, and the different ways in which they work in Europe, but it appears nobody in the Liberal Democrats read his book. (Ironically he almost became Lib Dem leader a few years back!)
I think many Lib Dem voters hoped that voting LD would result in a coalition with Labour, and were dismayed when they shacked up with the Conservatives. Then, they hoped the Lib Dems would work within the coalition to restrain the Conservatives from enacting the less popular aspects of their manifesto, which is cut spending, lower taxes, privatise, penalise and demonise.
The Lib Dems did not, but instead seemed to go for broke on major constitutional reform with no understanding that such things take time and need a lot of political capital to achieve. In securing a free hand in attempting election of the Lords, electoral reform and so on, they gave the Tories a free hand on all the things that mattered to Lib Dem voters. And then still failed at constitutional reform.
To many, it seems the Lib Dems sacrificed their principles in order to rig the constitution to make themselves indispensable to any future government no matter what their own political fortunes would be. Rather than making themselves indispensable by securing genuine nationwide popularity as a responsible party of the left.
So for now, at least, coalitions are pretty unpopular. Even in Scotland, it seems, as it looks like the SNP will secure a bigger majority by itself, and the other three parties hate each other only slightly less than they hate the SNP.
Anything other than a hung parliament would be a complete shock IMO looking at recent polls
I’m going to stick my neck out here and suggest UKIP will secure nothing like the sort of numbers they are currently polling at.
They really have not been put under the spotlight and are full of crackpots who have so many skeletons in their cupboards that it will all fall apart in the heat of battle when they are put under pressure. They have no coherent policies and are full of misogynists and racists whom women and minorities will not vote for.
They will do damage but I would be amazed if they win more than ten seats or poll 10%. I would back the SNP and LD to secure more seats than UKIP.
I may be wrong, as I agree this election is going to be really hard to read. I also agree it is a guaranteed hung Parliament and that fixed term elections will be proven to be the terrible idea many predicted and will either quickly modified out of all recognition or repealed completely.
Got to agree. Douglas Carswell was known to be a good constituency MP and his re-election reflects the success of his name more than the UKIP badge, IMO.
Apart from the remote possibilities of a Tory collapse or a change in the electoral system, I agree.
But Cameron & Miliband could destroy UKIP by offering a referendum early next year and agreeing to be bound by the result before the election. Regardless of the result, UKIP would have achieved its purpose and there would no longer be any need to vote UKIP.
You are pretty much definitely correct with all of this, I pretty much agree with you an all of this although I do think UKIP could poll around 11% in May (this would still likely result in less than 10 seats). Without doubt the SNP and Lib Dems will both win more seats than them, ironically the first past the post system that Nick Clegge fought so hard to try & change will be what saves his party embarassment, as I believe there will liked MP’s will manage to retain enough of the vote in concentrated areas to keep around 20MP’s , still a flop but considering they will probably only poll 1-2% better than UKIP winning around 15 more seats than them is pretty lucky.
As for this Election being hard to read, I’d say you are correct I am struggling to come to a conclusion on who the largest party will be , I expect something like this:
That sort of result or anything like it could potentially result in another election within a year, or it could result in both the Torys/Labour desperately offering other parties deals to try and form a workable coalition government.
I know this phrase is often used for hype purposes to get people engaged, but let me tell you this election truly is “too close to call” as of now.
I don’t think UKIP’s purpose is that simple any more. Their support is partly pro-referendum, but also anti-immigration and generally anti-politics. People who want to stick it to “Westminster” are pretty unlikely to just fall back to voting for the big two parties.
How do we think the turnout will be? Higher? Lower? The SNP’s had a major influx of new members, as have (apparently) the Greens, and Scottish turnout at the referendum was incredibly high. Could it be a case of reduced turnout in England and Wales, but record turnout in Scotland?
Don’t see it. If anything I would see a reduced turnout in Scotland for a “Westminster” election.
I don’t think you can draw any inference from the Referendum turnout up here - that was a one off. As for the SNP new members - I don’t think they joined to engage with “Westminster” politics - they are the Scots equivalent of the UKIP anti-politics movement and are only interested in their “Freedom!” shite not politics. Social media up here was inundated with them - clearly politically naive and increasingly only talking to themselves in their search for “traitors”. Numpties.
I suspect overall in the UK a lower turnout everywhere will be the norm as the electorate conclude it will only be “more of the same shit” whomever the vote for (that will have any power). I think they are wrong and this is the one election it will be worth voting in but there you are
I think that with the FPTP system in place we are always likely to discourage people from voting in very safe seats for some parties, having said that I expect this turnout to be high (around about 70%) and here’s why:
1.) UKIP - previously safe CON / LAB seats may be portrayed as less safe due to the rise of UKIP, thus encouraging more CON/LAB Supporters to come out in numbers to get behind there party & to make sure there candidate stays in, along with this there is also people voting UKIP as a protest vote that would otherwise possibly not vote, both these factors will help beef the turnout up.
2.) Scottish referendum - people in Scotland are furious at Labour and are getting behind the SNP in big numbers, the referendum has made more people in Scotland think about politics and therefore it will result in a high turnout in scotland.
3.) “Its too close to call” - A phrase we hear in so many elections these days, but one that actually very true looking at the current political landscape, the race is as close as it has ever been and you can bet your bottom dollar that the media will spin this as the closest election in history , and they have good reason to do this because looking at it now the polls could produce a statistical dead heat leading into polling day, meaning that people genuinely will not know who the largest party will be until election day, therefore more people will feel that there vote could be the key difference between Miliband or Cameron being able to form our next government, this will make people feel like there vote is actually worth something therefore they will feel more obliged to vote.
For these reasons I see a turnout of around 70% (or maybe even higher) , thats around 5% up on 2010.
There was a piece on Newsnight the other day about the upcoming election. Some polling wonk was interviewed. I generally agree with his prediction; the Tories to get the most votes, Labour probably the most seats, the number of LibDem seats to hold up relatively well, no overall majority.
UKIP to get a couple of seats at most, UKIP’s significance coming in the marginals. The voting numbers in Scotland to be higher than the UK(everyone who is likely to vote is now registered I believe) but not quite at the impressive turnout rates as the Referendum.
This may be worth posting, particularly in regards to Labour and the SNP in Scotland:
“Today we have a proper, bespoke Scottish poll by Ipsos MORI and if anything it shows the SNP doing even better than the crossbreaks suggested. Topline voting intentions in Westminster with changes since the general election are CON 10%(-7), LAB 23%(-19), LDEM 6%(-13), SNP 52%(+32), GRN 6%(+5). Full results are here”
Came here to post what seems to be the same poll but with interpretation.
Although the SNP will not do quite as well as this, it does look like there will be a massive increase in SNP representation at Westminster and a loss of Labour seats.
"The Labour Party in Scotland would face political annihilation if there was a general election tomorrow, according to a poll commissioned by STV.
The Ipsos Mori survey shows Labour would poll 23% of the Scottish vote, leaving them with just four seats in Scotland."
Now this would be interesting. Why? Because the SNP refuses to vote on English matters at Westminster!
Assume a SNP return of about 40 members (not unthinkable) and Labour about 13 LibDem 6, Conservative 0.
For the Irish seats assume: 8/9 Unionist, 8/9 Nationalist (but Sinn Fein not taking part), 1 Alliance
For the Welsh Seats assume Labour 30 Tory4 Plaid 3 LibDem 3
For the English seats assume Labour c210, Tory c260 LibDem 20, UKIP 20
Giving about 300 seats each to a potential LibDemLabour Coalition and to a ToryUKIP Coalition, both seeking support for supply from parties which traditionally do not get involved with UK Government.
On this analysis with the current poll position in Scotland, it would seem that the SNP might well have the whip hand in the final negotiations on Scottish settlement next year.
Quite possibly. Yet, it would be a brave Westminster party who were to risk being seen by English voters to be too cosy with the SNP, or, to cave into SNP demands. Especially in return for any short term power grab for government. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Strange bed fellows can exist, but I suspect any Party going into even an unofficial coalition with the SNP will result in LibDem levels of vote hemorrhaging in England, If *that *party is not seen as fighting tooth and nail for England’s benefit.
Putting my neck out again - the SNP will gain but not make any break through at the next election.
I will eat my hat if they get more than 13 seats - which would be a fantastic result for them albeit a disaster for Scotland and the UK - they are a joke but clearly that is my opinion shing thru. The LD will hold more seats than them - my guess would be at around 25 - which would be a disaster for them but still leave them as the main power brokers in any coalition.
The SNPs problem is that nobody will want to do a deal with them - virtually any other combination would be preferable to the other parties.