The United Kingdom Elections 2010

[Idaho]

IA is very partisan.

It is entirely possible that Brown will win. I still think that Labour will scrape a win out of it.

[InsaneApache]

IA is very partisan.

It is entirely possible that Brown will win. I still think that Labour will scrape a win out of it.

Hehe, you noticed! Bless.

The nightmare scenario is that Labour come third, yet hold more seats than the rest, so ergo our 'Great Leader' carries on as before. That's democracy for you.

[Myrddraal]

But the Lib Dems have ruled that out no? If Labour come third they will be dependent on the support of the Lib Dems to form a government, and the Lib Dems have said that in this situation, they will only negociate with Labour if Brown steps down as prime minister.

Latest polls:

.	Tory	Labour	Lib Dem
YouGov/Sun	33	28	29
Opinium/Express	34	25	28
ICM/Guardian	33	28	30
ComRes/ITV/Independent	32	28	31
Average	33	27.25	29.5

Very closely matched, very tight. Labour definately aren't toast, there's less than 6% between them and the Tories by the average.

[Myrddraal]

I know polls can be deceptive, but looking at those figures a hung parliament seems increasingly likely.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Interesting, this shows Labour consistantly coming third, but not far enough down to be wiped out. The situation is extremely worrying, I predict another election in less than three years.

[Subotan]

It may cause economic chaos, but by God is it going to be fun

[Furunculus]

It may cause economic chaos, but by God is it going to be fun

oh yes, won't it just be sweet!

thank god we have belgium to demonstrate just how wonderful consensual politics can be, won't it be just swell when people realise just how p00py-pants British adversarial politcs really is:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...691546,00.html

and in case anyone was wondering:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ectoral_system

oh what bliss!

[InsaneApache]

The party system and hence PR is the problem. Intrinsically undemocratic.

[Myrddraal]

Could it even happen that the Lib Dems form a government with the support of the Labour Party? It seems very unlikely. According to the UK Polling Report Swingometer, if there was a uniform swing across the country to match the latest polls, the result would be:

Tories : 254 seats (+56)
Labour : 267 seats (-89)
Lib Dem: 98 seats (+36)
Others : 13 seats (+1)

Of course, the super massive assumption there is the uniform swing bit, but it does illustrate the difficulty in winning seats for the Lib Dems.

[tibilicus]

My personal feelings regarding the poll data I've seen the past few days, I think it's still to soon to say anything is certain. I think this weeks debate will be crucial, provided people tune in, which they should, as it is on BBC1. I say this because it's really make or break in terms of the lib dem surge. As an electorate Britain generally votes in a very familiar way. To me this means that if Clegg wants to hold onto this level of support, he needs to cement himself in the minds of voters as a viable option. Whilst the support for the lib dems is currently huge, I suspect many of those saying they will vote lib dem aren't 100% behind it and could still break for either of the two parties if they get cold feet about Clegg in the final week. To me this means that in the final debate Clegg really has to shine. Not, just come out on top by a margin like the second debate but deliver a substantial performance which is better than the other two. It wont be possible for him to emulate the first debate but for me, If he's to win the level of support the polls are suggesting, he needs to be decisive. I think that if Clegg fails to do this, we could see the temporary lib dem support crumble.

As for the tories, their strategist needs a slap. People don't generally like negative campaigning, which the tories are now using and I think it wont result in the poll boost they desperately want. Also changing their electoral strategy to target more Labour seats with just over 2 weeks till polling day? To see the tories throw away a lead in this manner is laughable. Cameron was a PM in waiting a couple of months back, now he's struggling to persuade the electorate that he's even the best out of a bad bunch. Cameron's inability to coherently explain any of his policies is also making him look bad. I get the idea of the "big society", why not just drop the gimmicky face and tell us how it is, the spin just makes it all seem like rhetorical . Another classic example is a recent campaign broadcast attacking Labour. Apparently the tories think the deficit can be cut and the ecenomic situation solved simply by cutting QUANGOS and cutting up senior civil servants credit cards, give us a break Dave.


Labour are positioned to come out of this ok, even if they do perform badly on election day. As a political party, I fully believe that Labour, being the snake it is wont die. Everyone thought it was dead in 1983 but no, it climbed its way back up from the underworld and regenerated as New labour. Even if they do end up in the wilderness for a couple of years, we will see them again some day. Also, interestingly, the Labour vote is holding solid in Scotland. I have no idea why but I actually hope it stays like that. The SNP should be denied as many MP's as possible seeming they refuse to allow Scottish cuts even though the whole of the UK needs cuts. Alex Salmond also thinks he is a modern day Robert De Bruce, he's so desperate to be known as the man who" emancipated" Scotland that he's prepared to try and shove independence down the Scots throats, no matter how disastrous it would be for them under the current economic climate. I'm also opposed fundamentally to any party which wishes to see the disintegration of the union (N.I is different but now is not the time or the place to explain my view on that).

So that's my thoughts at this current stage. Basically the ball is with Clegg. He needs to make the surge translate into actual votes.

[CountArach]

Of course, the super massive assumption there is the uniform swing bit, but it does illustrate the difficulty in winning seats for the Lib Dems.

This article summarises that point quite nicely.

[al Roumi]

As was mentioned in the "Prioritizing government spending" thread, the parties have so far ignored the elephant in the room:

Parties attacked for failing to 'come clean' on cuts

Britain's leading financial thinktank today launched a strong attack on all three main political parties for their failure to come clean about the swingeing public spending cuts they will implement in the next parliament.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said it was "striking how reticent" Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg had been during the campaign on how they planned to tackle the UK's record peacetime budget deficit.

In an eagerly-awaited pre-election health check, the IFS said the public had been left in the dark about a period of sustained austerity in public spending.

"Over the next four years starting next year (2011-12), Labour and the Liberal Democrats would need to deliver the deepest sustained cuts to spending on public services since the late 1970s", said Robert Chote, the IFS director. "While starting this year, the Conservatives would need to deliver cuts to public spending on public services that have not been delivered over any five-year period since the Second World War."

The IFS said after taking into account pledges to ring-fence parts of public spending such as the NHS and overseas aid, the Conservatives would need to axe the budgets of unprotected Whitehall departments by £63.7bn in inflation-adjusted terms by 2014-15. Of these, only 17.7% had so far been specified.

Similarly, Labour had announced measures totalling just 13.3% of what it would need to slash spending by £50.8bn and the Liberal Democrats 25.9% of the £46.5bn they would need to save in order to meet their deficit reduction goals.

"Repairing the public finances will be the defining domestic policy task of the next government", Chote said.

It's a sticky wicket alright!