Guest post by Adrian Beaumont, who joins us from time to time to provide commentary on elections internationally. Adrian is a paid election analyst for The Conversation. His work for The Conversation can be found here, and his own website is here.
The UK general election is on Thursday. The Electoral Calculus site has Labour on 40.4% in its aggregate of national polls (up 0.9 since last Monday’s article), the Conservatives on 21.2% (up 1.3), the far-right Reform on 14.9% (down 2.9), the Liberal Democrats on 11.7% (down 0.1) and the Greens on 5.8%. Reform leader Nigel Farage’s pro-Russia comments on the Ukraine war ten days ago may have deflated Reform’s surge.
Owing to first past the post, Labour would win a massive landslide if these vote shares are replicated Thursday. Electoral Calculus gives them 465 of the 650 House of Commons seats, with the Lib Dems ahead of the Conservatives by 71 to 65 seats. The Scottish National Party would win 18 seats, Reform six and the Greens three.
Individual poll results range from Labour leads over the Conservatives from 15 to 25 points, though two have Reform ahead of the Conservatives in second place. The People Polling poll that had Reform 11 points behind Labour last week this week gave Labour 40% (up five), Reform 21% (down three) and the Conservatives 15% (steady).
In Scotland, Labour continues to lead the SNP by single-digit margins, and should make a large seat gain after winning just one of 59 Scottish seats in 2019. A recent seat poll of former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s Islington North, which Corbyn is contesting as an independent, has Labour’s candidate leading Corbyn by 43-29.
PM Rishi Sunak’s net favourablility in a YouGov poll conducted last week was -57, his lowest as PM. He has fallen from -42 in late May. Labour leader Keir Starmer’s net favourability was -20; it has been between -12 and -25 this year. The Conservative party’s net favourability was -56, while Labour’s was -12.
I covered the UK, US and French elections for The Conversation last Thursday (before the US debate). This has when to expect UK results on Friday AEST. Under Boris Johnson’s leadership, the Conservatives led in the polls until late 2021, and did not crash into their current position until after he was ousted.
Far-right RN underperforms in French first round results
The 577 French lower house seats are elected by a two-round single-member system. In Sunday’s first round, the far-right National Rally (RN) and allies won 32.4%, the left-wing alliance of four parties (NFP) 28.7%, President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Ensemble 21.6% and the conservative Republicans and other right-wing candidates 10.1%. Pre-election polls had RN in the mid to high 30s.
Turnout was high at 66.9% of registered voters. This meant 77 seats have been filled, where the winner had at least 50% of valid votes and at least 25% of registered votes. It also means that many third candidates cleared the 12.5% of registered voters required to advance. On these results, 307 seats will go to three-way runoffs and six to four-way runoffs.
In the runoffs next Sunday, FPTP will be used, but candidates can withdraw prior to the runoffs, for example to create a two-candidate contest to block RN. Candidates need to register for the runoffs by Tuesday.
Biden’s position worsens after debate
The US election will be held on November 5. In Thursday’s Conversation article, which was published the day before the debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump on Friday AEST, Biden was only 0.1 point behind Trump in FiveThirtyEight’s national poll aggregate. Better economic data and Trump’s conviction probably explain Biden’s gains.
Three days after the debate, Biden trails Trump by 41.7-40.4 with 9,1% for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Biden’s position is likely to worsen further as more post-debate polls come in. In a YouGov poll for CBS News, by 72-28 voters thought Biden should not be running for president (63-37 in February). By 72-29, they thought he does not have the mental health to be president (65-35 three weeks ago).
I do not understand why the RN results are described as “underperformed”?
Against what metric?
Macron’s party has been gutted.
I’m sure that the non-RN parties will cooperate to reduce the number of three and four candidate races in order to avoid splitting the anti-RN votes next Sunday.
Even if RN don’t seize the PMship, they will be a powerful force in the parliament and Le Pen will be well positioned to win the Presidency.
@fubar – underperformed means relative to expectations, which are set by opinion polls.
FUBAR, underperformed relative to pre-election polls, which had RN in the mid to high 30s.
Thanks
What are the likely seat projections for the French Assembly after the run-off polls, given today’s preliminary results?
At a guess I’d expect little flow from Macron’s party, the left NFP alliance or mainstream Gaullist (Conservatives) to the National Front. I’d expect a very large flow from Macron voters and Gaullists to the NFP alliance however. It seems to me – at a pretty uneducated guess – that the NFP and not the RN will get to form government next week. A shame really, because IMO the best way to kick Le Pen and her RN into the political gutter for another generation would be to let them form a government now and see how that works out.
“Pre-election polls had RN in the mid to high 30s.”
That’s not correct – they were only 36% – or maybe one showed 37% – when combined with the rebellious part of Les Republicains who wanted to ally with the RN to make a more powerful right-wing front.
Polls showing the RN by themselves never put them above 34% – so only a minor underperformance.
Though close enough for France – and the rest of us in Europe, especially Ukraine – to be worried about the prospect of the far-left winning the largest number of seats if the tactical voting has unintended consequences or if RN make a few gaffes this week.
The Far left alliance led by Jean-Luc Melenchon would be disastrous for the economy, for Ukraine and make any support for Israel very difficult as Melenchon is a confirmed anti-semitic. He is also Euro-sceptic and his economic policies are basically communist, with a green tinge.
Of course, a RN majority would not be great for Ukraine either, and there are certainly risks for the economy – although I think they would govern less radically when actually in power as they are smart enough to know what they need to do to gain some longevity there.
It’s telling that after the first polls came out in the campaign showing the left-wing alliance quite close to RN and with Macron’s Ensemble party far behind, the business sector reluctantly started befriending RN all of a sudden due to the fear of the far left alliance and their ‘expropriation’ policies (as they are perceived).
I think the flow from Ensemble to the NFP will depend on which element of the NFP is standing in different seats.
I can’t see Macron and Attal endorsing Melenchon’s La Insoumise candidates to stop the RN, but they will endorse Socialist and Ecologie party candidates.
Does that mean they remain neutral where it’s a LI vs RN match-up? How that works will be interesting.
The support/endorsements of the remaining LR centre-right party will also be key as, although a diminished force, they are still influential as a ‘voice of reason’ and reckoned to be decent stewards of the economy historically etc.
So as not to divide their party any further, I would think they would endorse on a candidate by candidate basis, but in practice I would expect them to endorse more of RN than NFP, and no way they will be endorsing Melenchon’s LI ! They may just decide to remain neutral in many seats, although if the far left look closer to power they will become much more outspoken.
UK
Reform party vote % seems pretty stubborn with them having plateaued at a still elevated level – though well short of what they would have needed to become the official opposition – either through winning the 2nd most number of seats or staking the claim by winning the 2nd highest number of votes (without winning the 2nd most number of seats).
They therefore look on course to remain fringe albeit with some MPs and a much heightened awareness of them amongst the public.
If Nigel Farage gets into Parliament as seems slightly more likely than not, it will definitely liven up the place whatever your views of him.
Jeremy Corbyn
The poll of Islington North showed him a very strong 2nd place as an Independent, trailing Labour 43%-29%.
With more local Labour members publicly campaigning for him since then as well, and the expectation of a large Labour win nationally (so not a critical seat for Labour), I personally rate his chances of winning at at least 50%, with perhaps 40% of the vote he would win.
He knows the seat like the back of his hand and has been working it hard.
I find Corbyn contemptuous as an individual but it would certainly be a slap in the face for Labour and a thorn in Starmer’s side in Parliament if he won. Probably once safely installed in government, Labour may bow to pressure from the left of the party and let him back into the fold to keep the peace in their party.
It is a fantastis story that starts with filming of shooting of John Wayne’s flop movie and ends with bloodymindedness of MAGA Mike and his House GOP after the act was passed in Senate with 69 votes. (Shaking by head emoji)
A John Wayne flop has been linked to high cancer rates. A new documentary aims to tell the community’s story.
https://thehill-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/4743810-conqueror-hollywood-fallout-radiation-exposure/amp/?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQGsAEggAID#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17198146621205&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fpolicy%2Fenergy-environment%2F4743810-conqueror-hollywood-fallout-radiation-exposure%2F
I somehow doubt Corbyn in parliament as an independent would be any threat to Keir Starmer with a decent sized majority.
The Sunday Times and the Financial Times have both called for a vote for Labour, that hasn’t happened since 2001 I think. Will the Sun follow suit later in the week?
The Daily Telegraph, the Express and the Daily Mail are all solidly pro Sunak.
According to the Guardian, the Liberal Democrats are going after supposedly safe Tory seats in the South of England, including of course Jeremy Hunt’s constituency.
”
Andrew_Earlwoodsays:
Monday, July 1, 2024 at 5:03 pm
What are the likely seat projections for the French Assembly after the run-off polls, given today’s preliminary results?
”
Exit polls projection:
Mojority mark: 287
RN: about 240
Macron party about 100
Left block about 150-180
If one considers that ‘Reform’ holds an equivalent place in UK politics to our National Party (I know in many ways it doesn’t, but …), then under a preferential voting system that “Implied voting intention” poll by YouGov ends up giving results not that dissimilar to current polling in australia, doesn’t it?
Labour – 29% vs ALP – 31%
Greens (UK) – 13% vs Aust Greens (13%)
Combined Reform & Tory – 34% vs LNP – 35%
However, I’m not sure about the UK Lib Dem vote. They are a lineal descent of Walpole’s eighteenth century Whigs – and a party of government up until about 90 years ago: so they don’t really equate to the Teals in Australia. Especially at 12-14% of the national vote …
On France, I don’t really understand how anyone could regard Melanchon controlling it as any less of a disaster than Le Pen being in charge?
If the RN does pull up short of a majority, then Macron’s gamble might have worked. The polling trend at the time of the EU elections was a lot worse as I recall.
On UK, unless I am missing something the voting intention seems to have been remarkably consistent through the campaign period. Rishi seems no hope of coming back from here. I won’t miss him.
Like Labor taking office in Australia after nine years of conservative rule, Labour in UK will have a hard road to hoe. The voters will be demanding more services, yet the cupboard is bare and Brexit won’t help make it any less bare.
There has never been a better time to tax billionaires more.
On USA, if the debate is confirmed to start turning voters against the Dems (and it should) surely they cannot wait too long to start looking forward a new candidate?
The longer they wait the more Trump might build momentum till the point where even a new candidate can’t turn it around.
The Lib -Dems are Tories in sandals. If I were running against the fascists in France I would run ads reminding the people of their traitorous past. Good ole Petain and all that and the welcome mat being laid out to a foreign invader. I reckon the French public have either forgotten or don’t know about it.
What an ignoramus you are Clem:
“Tory! Tory! Tory!”
To which your conclave of seagulls down at St Kilda Pier answer “squawk squawk squawk!”
Time for some more tawny port old sport.
The “Hex” maps that all the media in the UK use at election time of their electorates always look like a giant rabbit to me. Or an old lady in a bonnet.
France – If National Rally fails to get a majority, the most likely outcome is some sort of technocratic government to appease all the non-NR parties. The prime minister of France is appointed by the President and the parliament only has the option of disposing them via a motion of censure (a bit like the Westminster system). Macron is not going to appoint Melenchon because he not survive a vote of censure from the NR and the centre.
Would anyone care to suggest a site for the results of the UK election? Not only am I interested in the overall result, but I’d also like to check on individual seats. Thanks.
And, since I’m here, it was mentioned in an earlier thread – I think it was hereabouts – that proxies can’t lodge a vote for their voter by post. Yes, they can. My proxy did so, and it is also mentioned somewhere on the UK Electoral Commission site.
BT, the 32.4% for the National Rally includes its allies. There’s been some changes since the article, so it’s now 33.2% RN, 28.1% NFP and 21.3% Ensemble. As a party, RN won 29.3%.
126 three-way runoff races and three four-way races remain after candidate withdrawals. Today is the last day for candidates to withdraw.
Adrian – Is there a list that you have found of who is left in the contests?
clem attlee says:
Monday, July 1, 2024 at 8:49 pm
How do you bring yourself to have anything to do with Germany or Japan?
“I find Corbyn contemptuous as an individual but it would certainly be a slap in the face for Labour and a thorn in Starmer’s side in Parliament if he won.”
Why? It wouldn’t be a surprise if Corbyn remained popular in the seat he represented for decades, just as it isn’t a surprise that even amid the gigantic shitshow of the Tory government, some seats will still vote for the Tories or for Farage because the people there are just so right wing. That’s not a slap in the face, that’s democracy. You can’t represent all the people simultaenously.
I think Corbynistas are a minor thorn in Starmer’s side whether he’s in Parliament or not. Maybe slightly more if he wins? But still minor.
I really don’t know what Macron thought he was doing with the snap election.
There’s actually very little hard evidence that Biden has been greatly weakened by his debate performance (surprising, as it was awful), and if we consider margin-of-error changes, polling still seems to be around 42-40 for Trump, with a whole heap of undecideds – and they may yet break for Biden when the time comes. It could be that the many pundits talking about how poor Biden was have overlooked that many voters have been reminded what an inveterate liar Trump remains.
And as neatly explained on Electoral-Vote.com, it could be that a plurality of voters understand that while the system can handle an ineffective president pretty well (eg late Wilson, Eisenhower & Reagan), it can’t really handle a malignant actor like Trump. As they pithily put it, if a voter decides that the choice is between a vegetable and fascist, the choice is still pretty easy to make.
Re UK, the campaign appears to have changed very little, and Labour is heady for a landslide win. It wouldn’t surprise me to see the actual votes narrow a bit from the polls (for Labour to “underperform”, as AB might have it), but it should still be a pretty stonking win.
Re France, definitely a concern that the far Right has done so well, but it could be the high water mark for them. Personally, I think of greater note has been the resurgence of the Left, who were largely a disorganised rabble a month ago, to fall not that far short of RN in the end. It will be interesting to see which way Macron’s voters go on Sunday – a centre-Left majority is still a plausible outcome.
Jonathan Pie (English comedian Tom Walker) reviews 14 years of Tory Government in the UK (warning – language).
https://youtu.be/cKAeO-5saqQ?si=7J5Zg0kCYzR_R09d
https://data.spectator.co.uk
The central expectation has remained static, with the “nowcast” number of seats for the Torys being stuck in the 80’s the entire campaign. On the other hand, the variance around that expectation has been high and remained high even into the closing days.
The standard deviation of Tory seats (implied from the bookie odds) started around 35 seats and has only moved in slightly to 33 seats in the last couple of days.
The Torys are going to lose, but every scenario from “saved the furniture” to “not the opposition” is still in play.
https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast
https://www.betfair.com.au/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.223763243
An hour-by-hour guide to UK election night, highlighting key results, declaration times and swings needed for seats to change hands.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/labour-robert-buckland-london-greater-manchester-ashington-b2572263.html
Historian Robert Saunders says talk of a “supermajority” (by the Tories in their current ads and by supporting newspapers) is absurd, but Britain does have a problem with executive power.
https://gladstonediaries.blogspot.com/2024/07/in-britain-supermajorities-are-norm-and.html
“Like a desperate screenwriter, rummaging in the dustbins of the Marvel Comic Universe, the Conservatives have stumbled upon a new villain. “The Supermajority” may lack some of the glamour of The Green Goblin or Dr Doom, but he strikes no less terror into his victims. According to Grant Shapps – a man with a few secret identities of his own – a Labour supermajority would wield “unchecked power”, plunging the country into “a dangerous place”. Labour, warns Rishi Sunak, could “change the rules so that they are in power for a very long time”, allowing them to do “whatever they want to our country”. The party’s loyal newspapers warn of “4 Days to Stop a Supermajority”, before the Leader of the Opposition bastes himself in gamma rays, hulks out on the campaign trail and unleashes “Starmergeddon” on a petrified nation.
Like most comic-scripts, such claims do not withstand much scrutiny. If Labour wins big on Thursday, it will acquire the normal powers of a majority government and be subject to the normal constraints. What’s spooking the Conservatives is not a “supermajority”, but a majority in hands other than their own. For the rest of us, the concern is not any novel situation that might emerge this week, but the lack of checks on all governments under Britain’s current constitutional arrangements. Fixing that problem will require a more thoughtful discussion than the Hollywood fantasies of recent press releases.
……………………..
A “supermajority” is one that, by passing a certain threshold, unlocks a set of powers that don’t come with a normal majority. This is a common feature of many constitutional systems, which require a special majority to amend the constitution, override a presidential veto or close down debate where opponents are “filibustering”. Securing that majority radically changes what a government can do, opening up dramatic new possibilities for change.
The UK does not have that system. Under the theory of parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament can abolish the monarchy, change the electoral system or annexe France by the normal process of legislation. It doesn’t matter whether the majority is ten or two hundred: Britain has no special categories of legislation beyond the reach of a regular majority. Parliament has, occasionally, written higher thresholds into specific pieces of legislation: the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act, for example, required two-thirds of MPs to vote for an early election. But as we saw in 2019, that could be overruled by a new Act of Parliament, which required only a majority of one.”
Work to rule – But the saved the furniture scenarios you are talking about are likely to be the worst result on record (156 seats). So it is more of a saved “some of furniture” and we can remain as a semi-viable opposition without having to give literally everyone a job (Current shadow cabinet is 28 I think, plus another couple of extra shadow junior minsters per cabinet member, whips… it gets to about 80 positions all up).
If they get down into the double figures, they almost do need to give everyone a role and if there is infighting (not much of an if really) that becomes a major problem. A leader needs to be able to fire people who misbehave or are plotting a takeover.
The post election Tory leadership fight is going to be an absolute blood letting session. I can see why there is a suggestion that should Sunak remain as leader for a brief period of time. But I think he has a private plane fuelled up for a Saturday flight to California already in mind.
“What an ignoramus you are Clem:
“Tory! Tory! Tory!”
To which your conclave of seagulls down at St Kilda Pier answer “squawk squawk squawk!”
Time for some more tawny port old sport.”
I think you are the ignoramus mate. Err, hark back to 2010. Who went into coalition with the Tories? Oh, it was the Lib Dems wasn’t it. They heralded in 14 years of neo liberal austerity. I think you are the dumb, dumb. What a twit you are.
clem attlee
I think you are the ignoramus mate. Err, hark back to 2010. Who went into coalition with the Tories? Oh, it was the Lib Dems wasn’t it. They heralded in 14 years of neo liberal austerity. I think you are the dumb, dumb. What a twit you are.
——————
The LibDems are not Tories and have always been separate parties but coalition governments were common and Clem Attlee sat in Churchill’s war time cabinet and his Labour were not Tories.
I cannot believe I’m actually finding myself in agreement with Clem of all people, but his (IMO, rather fair) point isn’t that the Liberal Democrats are literally members of the Conservative Party but that the economic policies they espouse effectively make them Tories in all but name. And with the Orange Book Liberals that were enthusiastically on board with Davie Cameron’s austerity policies still apparently dominant in the party, it’s a difficult to argue against that.
The 2010-2015 Conservative / Lib-Dem government cannot be compared with the WWII war cabinet. They were totally different situations.
Mexicanbeemer wrote, “The Lib Dems are not Tories and have always been separate parties but coalition governments were common and Clem Attlee sat in Churchill’s war time cabinet and his Labour were not Tories.”
Ha, talk about false equivalence. Your desperation is showing through with that comment. Serving in a national government when facing an existental threat in war time, is not quite the same thing as what the Lib Dems did in 2010 is it? But you run with it mate…ha, ha!
14 years of Tories in 5 minutes courtesy of Jonathon Pie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKAeO-5saqQ
Asha gets it. Lib Dems are much like the Teals. All warm and fuzzy when it comes to social policy, but grim faced neo liberals when it comes to economic policy.
Leroy
Re: Supermajority
But that’s only accurate technically speaking.
I am old enough to remember how ineffectual the opposition was in the UK 1997-2005 because they were SO far behind the government and were struggling with their own identity as you would expect after elections where hundreds of seats are lost, therefore more introspective than was helpful for holding the government truly to account.
Furthermore, regardless of the vote % of the governing party (which is quickly forgotten / not noticed by the public), holding the vast majority of seats gives the perception they are omnipotent, or at least more popular than they really are, and can be expected to do what they like and it’s not really fair to question it. They are, if you like, ‘too powerful’ – even if bigger majorities do generally squabble more.
That was with c. 165 seats in opposition.
Given every scenario suggests the ‘main’ opposition after 4 July will have fewer seats than 165, this will be even more true.
You don’t have to have constitutional ramifications relating to supermajorities for the point to be a very valid one.
Weak opposition = poorer government
Strong opposition = better government (they are kept on their toes more and have to be on top of their game – look how sporting teams up their game against stronger opponents ‘asking lots of questions of them’).
Journalists trying to rubbish the point re supermajorities are those that would rather like the Tories to be annihilated and worried the warnings about Labour being given a free ride will hit home (that’s fine, it’s a free country – but they’re not unbiased commentators).
Lib Dems are the same as they ever were – chameleons.
They change their colours according to which seats they target.
They’ll be ok this election as it’s all about beating Tories – just like 1997 for them.
But when Labour get into government and losing popularity, Lib Dem will again have opportunities in Labour-held seats that are more left-wing in the cities. And again they will win MPs who are saying diametrically opposite things to their constituents from one seat to another.
And if / when they get into government again, they will be exposed once again as – obviously – being unable to satisfy everyone who voted for them who will, again, feel betrayed – think 2015 wipeout.
Though equally they could one day go into coalition with Labour/SNP and hold onto more of their left-wing vote thereafter; and be annihilated in the leafy villages. In other words, 2015-2024 in reverse in terms of where they retain some standing.
clem attlee
Ha, talk about false equivalence. Your desperation is showing through with that comment. Serving in a national government when facing an existental threat in war time, is not quite the same thing as what the Lib Dems did in 2010 is it? But you run with it mate…ha, ha!
——————————-
That’s an overreaction by your standards and they were different coalitions but the point was a coalition government is only a coming together of parties and not a merger of parties. The Liberals / LibDems are similar to the teals because they appeal to the same liberal minded voters but the Tories are a separate political entity.
The problem in Parliament isn’t really the size of the Labour majority but the lack of opposition members required to make the place work and provide a strong voice against the Government.
There are 3 Deputy Speakers. The 1st (Chairman of Ways and Means) and 3rd Deputies come from the opposition benches.
There are getting on for 35 Departmental Select and topic based committees plus some that run Parliament like Standards & Priviledges that need members. They will all need opposition members on them.
The opposition gets allocated to chair a number of them in proportion to the party strengths in the House. And some committees are required to be chaired by a member of the largest opposition party such as the Public Accounts Committee and the Standards Committee.
And then there are the Bill committes that look in depth at legislation. A committee is created for each Bill.
And then there will be shadow cabinet posts to be filled though they can double up or basically not have like for like equivalents.
Plus whips are needed – two opposition whips get paid extra because they are needed to make the house work by working with the government on the scheduling of debates and votes. Whips then traditionally don’t speak in debates or take on other roles.
All that is hard to do when you have a single opposition party with 200 ish seats as there are some members who don’t want any extra jobs and there are some you don’t want anywhere near an extra job!
It will be even harder when they are two and fractured and have even less than a hundred each.
There are ways around the lack of parliamentary opposition. Standing rules can be changed, some of the committee chairs can be shared with the crossbench, some of opposition shadow ministries can be done by members of the lords (there are a lot conservatives up there), the number of required whips is greatly reduced when there is nobody to whip….
But sometimes, even that is not enough. In 1987 in New Brunswick in Canada, the Liberals won every single seat. As a result they allowed the second places party to submit Questions for Question time. In Singapore, after they realised that some opposition could be a benefit they create controversial extra seats for opposition (not a great example however as nobody liked them).
But what will happen is it is likely to be death of conservatives in their current form. The membership is mostly old and seem to agree with the Reform platform more than the Torie’s own. And if they go down the Reform path, there is a limit to how much support they can get; it is not going to be enough get themselves elected again under FPTP and certainly not with some type of proportional.
It would also alienate the “One Nation” conservatives, the Rory Stewart types (AKA “Rory Tories”). Like how the SPD split away from Labour in the early 1980s due to the Labour party’s shift to the Left, I can see there being some form of breakaway from the conservatives if there is a shift to the Right. But what made the SPD strong was their alliance with the Liberals, and this time it might not happen as the strongest places for “Rory Tories” is probably going to be in Lib Dem seats.
@B.S Fairman. Yeah, it’s probably fair to call the best case for the Torys as “saving some of the furniture”. Although if they do manage to scrabble past 150 seats, I expect it will be spun as a Dunkirk moment.
Is Biden slated to do an Independence Day speech this week?
Providing that he is up to it (ie. he remains verbal), I think that is would be a great opportunity to honorably fall on his sword in front of his nation. Yet his actions to date have shown that he is without honor.
I doubt very much that it would have been the Liberal Democrats’ first choice to form a coalition with the Conservatives in 2010, but the numbers effectively gave them no option to do it with anyone else – to get to a majority, Labour+Liberal Democrats would also have needed almost all of the nationalists and Northern Irish parties and it’s hard to see how any such arrangement could have lasted for long. The alternative, of course, would have been a confidence-and-supply deal without entering government themselves.
Survation MRP 15 June-1 July predicts:
Labour 484 seats (+ 282 on 2019)
Con 64 (-301)
LD 61 (+ 50)
SNP 10 (-37)
Reform 7 (+7)
Plaid Cymru 3 (+1)
Green 3 (+2)
The +/- in brackets are probably a bit out as 2019 results on new boundaries show different numbers, eg LD with only 7 not 11 seats IIRC, so that would be +54 not +50, but I think this shows the gist fairly well. . .
The latest batch of conducted polls generally show a modest recent swing back to the Tories, perhaps 2% if they’re lucky (or 4% based on what the Aussies seem to call ‘swing’), this is still nothing short of record-breaking defeat but enough to ensure they are indisputably the main opposition after the election.
@BT (hello, are we related?)
Correct, it was a very turbulent time with the GFC still occurring in essence and the LD going into coalition was the responsible thing to do to provide stability and certainty to the economy.
For people with romantic dreams and heavy emphasis of ‘values’, this was too much to accept and, as we know, they left the LDs in droves.
Shame, they were a mixed bag but they had some decent people like Danny Alexander who I was sorry to see lose their seats in 2015.
Reform – I actually think there’s a significant chance that:
1. Nigel Farage won’t win Clacton after all; or
2. Reform win zero seats.
Neither of the above are my prediction, however, although my gut is telling me 1. is distinct possibility.