When Winning Feels Like Losing
Published May 06, 2005
Other countries run a first past the post electoral system, most notably the US--though in their case it is not for a Parliamentary system, and so the distortions that get thrown up are rarely as wild as they can be in the British system.
Labour, with a solidly projected 36% of the popular vote, are still going to end up with a 10% majority of the seats. The Tories, with 33%, get around 50 more seats, but that percentage of the vote is exactly the same as it was last time. The Liberal Democrats get a consistent 6-7% (going as high as 17%) swing against Labour and yet only come out with ten or so more seats.
At the same time, the exit poll from MORI is pretty much on the button from the get go. Truly God does play dice (not that there is one).
And the Very Reverend looks like he spent the night being pushed against the wall and slapped continuously all the time trying to get in edgeways: 'But its an historic third term for Labour.' And so it is, but one can't help thinking that it's going to be a very, very short term for Mr Blair.
We are about to live in interesting times again.
As for the Wyre Forest, the Good Doctor survived a massive drain on his vote and is still our MP. Good old Bert Priest (Monster Raving Loony) got 303 votes, including our two, which I think was the highest vote they polled last night. In the end it was a vote of considerable high value, as it cost me nothing and nothing was changed, though nobody noticed.
- When Winning Feels Like Losing
- Published: May 06, 2005
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Politics
- Writer: theSliver
- theSliver's BC Writer page
- theSliver's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
I think you may be writing Blair off too soon. He's a personable fellow with foreign policy positions which appeal to Torries and a do-nothing domestic policy with the trappings of Labour values. That's hard to beat in a parliamentary system where any form of extremism tends to get slapped down hard. Plus, Britain has its own, growing 'slient majority' who are fed up with national weakness, pandering and rising crime and economic problems. Blair may not be the kind of leader they want, but he;s the kind they're willing to settle for.
Dave
Blair is toast within the year.
And the Tories look good in the next election (2010?)...
Blair has already said he's going in this term. There are around 50 Usual Suspects who bring his actual working majority for his more extreme measures, such as ID cards, down to around 15-16.
Yes, the British know the difference between voting for the candidate and voting for the party but in a peculiar way they manage to do both at the same time. Only by doing that would you have the very skewed results that you had last night. In one constituency there's a 27% swing to the Liberal Democrats, but that doesn't count in all marginals.
It was a very peculiar voting pattern that managed overall to conform exactly to the polls and exit polls but in individual constituencies to be wildly off beam.
>>Blair has already said he's going in this term
Sorry sliver - what does that mean? Did you skip a word? colloquialism?
I haven't seen any word on turnout. (Or is voting compulsory like in Australia?) Higher or lower than last time?
Not seeing a lot of commentary yet (surprise surprise) that Bush got a major re-election win; then Howard got an historic re-election win and now Blair gets a historic win, but with slight diminishment. Seems like a repudiation of the anti-war Left's message to me.
Well, there is a media spin about it all.
Bush and Howard and Blair all supposedly won DESPITE their support for the liberation of Iraq...
And if they had lost? It would have been BECAUSE of their support for the liberation of Iraq...
39 percent did not turn out, more than the 21 percent of the 44 million who voted for Labour.
Rj - it was more than Iraq. Other than Iraq, Labour lost on issues that would have got Bush more votes if he took the flip side - immigration and taxes among them.
I respect Tony Blair like I respect John McCain. A true core sense of right and wrong and honesty in front of the public - missing in most politicians. But sometimes that gets deliberately "forgotten" for the sake of .. I'm not sure what.
>>Blair has already said he's going in this term
That just means he's already said he's going to resign before the next election.
The win is historic because its the third successive win by Labour which has not happened before but its also a defeat in that he lost 100 seats. The historic importance is diminished somewhat because it would have taken a more than 10% swing to the Tories across the entire country the actual national swing was just over 2%.
The Tories increase was almost entirely a recapturing of the core votes it had lost to UKIP. The campaing they ran also inflated the success of other even further right wing parties such as the BNP, a neo-fascist party.
It will be an easier reach in the next General Election, but there is no certainty when that will be. Terms last up to five years but tend to last no more than four.
In Blair's own constituency the father of a military policeman that died in Iraq stood and got over 4,000 votes and in his acceptance speech pummeled Blair (metaphorically), and the reaction was evident to anyone that saw it.
The anti-war sentiment gained the Liberal Democrats a 10% rise in their vote and more than significant gains against Labour. The anti-war stance isn't confined to the left wing its pervasive throughout the spectrum.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/29099)
Dead on accurate. People may make their decision on the person, but in reality people vote for the party.
Any feeling on whether the British people realize this? Just curious. I have a feeling most do.