No matter how shitty your opposition is, holding an extra election when you already hold the government is an act of madness
No matter how shitty your opposition is, holding an extra election when you already hold the government is an act of madness
Thank you for that entirely uninformed comment.
Beast's Lair: Useful Notes
(Lightweight | PDF)
Updated 01/01/15
If posts are off-topic, trolling, terrible or offensive, please allow me to do my job. Reporting keeps your forum healthy.
Seika moderates: modly clarifications, explanations, Q&A, and the British conspiracy to de-codify BL's constitution.
Democracy on Beast's Lair
Oh by all means, do correct
1955 snap election: Governing Conservatives gain twenty-three seats to ensure a comfortable majority.
1966 snap election: Governing Labour gain forty-eight seats to attain safety from a razor-thin majority of two.
1974 snap election: Governing Labour gain eighteen seats from a minority position to allow majority government.
(Perhaps uppermost in her mind - 2007: Governing Labour fail to call a snap election after the accession of Gordon Brown, are defeated in the next normal election, and look liable to remain out of office for more than a decade afterwards).
- MPs rebel. May is under attack from the left of the party over a hard Brexit and education reform, and from the right of the party over a soft Brexit and taxation. Her majority is unacceptably thin for dealing with these fronts, especially if they simultaneously decide that whatever European solution she comes up with is unacceptable and both go after her at once.
- Talking of rebels, if she's really lucky, she can get some of her malcontents deselected, or even booted out by being thrown to the constituency dogs if they went a different way on Brexit than their voters. Ken Clarke, perennial thorn in her side, is liable to flat-out retire on the grounds of age, for a start.
- She is currently working under a Cameron manifesto, a fact highlighted by the NIC crisis which forced that section of the Budget to be withdrawn in a yet-unmatched humiliation for her and her Chancellor. That manifesto being excessively small government and financially strict for her new brand of paternalism (or maternalism as you prefer), she will want it gone. Given this is liable to be a crushing victory, she can also stack that manifesto almost entirely to her liking, including things like dropping the pensions triple-lock.
- She gets to have two more years in power, years unsullied by uncomfortable Brown-type questions over whether the country voted either May herself or her programme in. It's our favourite word: M A N D A T E.
- Labour are dead in the water - I think it's short-termism to concentrate on the present fact over what one might do in the future, but it's certainly still true right now. (I also think ideas about a Lib Dem bounce are significantly overstated, and it's not comparable to the potential gains from Labour).
- I think UKIP are dead; nevertheless, they're not yet buried. In 2020, they might manage a last desperate zombie lurch. Right now, the only movement that shambling corpse is making is gnawing its own arm off.
- The economy remains strong despite Brexit, a trend unlikely to continue through to 2020 and the actual departure, if only on the grounds that we're due for a downswing anyway.
- Leaving things to 2020 not only gives Labour the vague possibility of voting against Brexit at some stage and winning back the part of their support that despise Corbyn for his spinelessness, but in general allows people to look at the Brexit they get and go "That's not my Brexit". (Whether they wanted one or not). Right now it essentially remains undecided and therefore Leavers can still assume they'll get whatever they personally want.
I genuinely don't know whether this is the right call for May. In absolute strategic terms, I think maybe it isn't, that they're probably weakened for a 2022 election by this versus the prospective results of 2020 and then 2025. It may even be that this election will backfire, though I think the possibility of that is far below the odds.
But is it madness? Never. It's an entirely justifiable strategic call that has solid reasoning and good historical precedent.
Beast's Lair: Useful Notes
(Lightweight | PDF)
Updated 01/01/15
If posts are off-topic, trolling, terrible or offensive, please allow me to do my job. Reporting keeps your forum healthy.
Seika moderates: modly clarifications, explanations, Q&A, and the British conspiracy to de-codify BL's constitution.
Democracy on Beast's Lair
I'm not saying that she won't gain seats. In fact, I agree it's the LIKELY outcome. But a majority, thin or not, isn't to be risked, especially amidst this whole "global political instability" thing we've got going on. Sure, Labour is flopping around like a fish on the deck, but letting them continue to do that instead of setting up another chance to oust that lump is a much better move. And the LibDem matter, while I agree unlikely, DOES exist, and there's no good enough reason to toss that thin majority to them and UKIP and risk having to coalition with someone.
There's one good thing to say about Brexit, regardless how you feel about it. It eviscerated UKIP much as one does to a fish in a processing plant.
- - - Updated - - -
Opinion polls, worth as much as they are these days, put the Lib Dems at nine seats. Not really a turbulent force of opposition. May's biggest opponents are currently the SNP, who want to go and form their own country.Originally Posted by Whis
May's opponents are literally anyone who might flip a seat. They had no chance to do this for years, and might possibly do so now. As I said, I think she has better odds of getting that larger majority she wants, but I would also say that no odds are worth it when you only need to lose, what, 3-4 seats?
I thought you'd have approved of an 'unelected' Tory PM calling an election where she could lose seats.
(I say 'unelected' because we don't really elect a PM like that but w/e)
A majority which doesn't allow you to carry out your legislative programme isn't a majority.
A majority which harries you, delays you, extracts favours from you, and hamstrings you while you're trying to carry out the programme is technically a majority, but is a real sodding nuisance.
Look, it's fundamentally a simple risk-reward analysis. The (short-term) risk is low, the rewards are great. Assuming May is only thinking about the next five years, I honestly think she's already had to take plenty more difficult decisions as PM already.
And, I know Corbyn's a loony no-one sane wants for PM, but we are fundamentally not in the absurdly polarised position of the U.S. where the two-party state leads to such demonisation of the opposition. I feel like you're assessing it in a paradigm where the problem with even a tiny risk is that the negative outcome is utterly and unbearably awful. It won't be the end of the world; we don't think that way, and it won't turn out that way. Labour aren't just a radicalised Corbyn machine: they're still a vehicle for plenty of sane strands of thought and still have plenty of sane MPs (who'd make Corbyn wish for May's rebel problems if he got into power). The Conservatives would sit back, reassess, reform, and show Labour how to be an effective Most Loyal Opposition while readying themselves for the next cycle. Keep calm; carry on.
Beast's Lair: Useful Notes
(Lightweight | PDF)
Updated 01/01/15
If posts are off-topic, trolling, terrible or offensive, please allow me to do my job. Reporting keeps your forum healthy.
Seika moderates: modly clarifications, explanations, Q&A, and the British conspiracy to de-codify BL's constitution.
Democracy on Beast's Lair
I didn't say I don't approve of it, but I'm for the other end.
E: though incidentally Corbyn is a lump who weighs down the party, but if by the infinite power of Christ he were to actually end up in the hotseat he'd still be better than Thatcher 2.0 or Pigman
E2: with the caveat that, as pointed out, Labour's herd of cats MPs would never let him revive the 70's
Last edited by 2Bad; April 19th, 2017 at 06:54 PM.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39647434
O'Reilly's been sacked
- - - Updated - - -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articl...ting-far-right
I don't understand people sometimes
replace bill with tomi
It's funny because any time anyone has ever thought this the politician always follows througha bluff: a ploy to win conservative votes.
Another girl died in Venezuela... It's a bit graphic.
Spoiler:
now we just need hannity gone
[18:00] Spinach: Because I don't like Saber's personality but boy oh boy does she make my dick turn to diamonds when I see her getting tentacled.
[18:01] Leo: feeling superior to EU makes me hard
[16:16] <Bloble> Drakengard? Is that a rhythm game?
Pretty soon Fox will just be a 24/7 stream of Tucker Carlson.
Tomi
Tomi has already been made an unperson like every assembly line blonde who breaks programming once
Good riddance
Apparently shot dead by venezuelan paramilitary forces while she was walking down the street.
Posting Permissions
