Whither Scotland? Well, apart from Labour regaining the two seats it lost in by-elections not a single seat changed hands north of the border. Indeed there was a swing to Labour and I suspect that Brown and Jim Murphy won votes when they warned that a vote for anyone else was a de facto vote
OK, so the exit poll wasn’t bonkers after all. And Cleggmania evaporated like so many other summer romances. But it’s the Lib Dems, in many ways, not Labour who have cost Cameron his majority. Of the top fifteen Lib Dem held targets, the Tories seem to have won just five. Doubtless the Lib Dems were
Well, 26 minutes in to the BBC broadcast and, unsurprisingly, no-one has learnt anything useful. I don’t believe this exit poll that would, apparently, leave the Lib Dems with fewer seats is at all accurate. In fact I’d say it is bonkers. The fact that the broadcasters won’t give us percentages is itself absurd and
There’s been a sad lack of country music in these parts lately. But now that the campaigning is done, it’s time to make amends for that. So here’s a country playlist for the election. Like you know, if country music can’t explain something most likely it ain’t worth explaining… Porter Wagoner and Dolly Parton offer
It stops at the Tweed. Dave was in Glasgow and East Renfreshire yesterday on the Scottish leg of his 36-Hour-Dash-To-Save-the-United-Kingdom but, while symbolically useful, it won’t have done him or his party that much good north of the border. Today’s Scotsman poll puts the Tories on 17% in Scotland. More remarkably, the Scotsman finds that
David Frum graciously plays the role of referee in this year’s Massie vs O’Sullivan discussion and delivers what is, I think, a fair judgement. He grants that O’Sullivan is right to warn about the danger that the Cameron Project might seem inauthentic or cynical and that, as David puts it, “the extremity of the crisis”
Pete asks whether Labour’s tactical voting ploy can work. My suspicion is that it cannot and will not. This is not 1997. There is all the difference in the world between voting tactically against a government and voting tactically against the idea of a government that may otherwise come to power. More generally, the advice
Paul Waugh has an excellent post on the difficulties and opportunities that will face Cameron if he falls short of winning a majority. Much of the commentary on this has hitherto focused on the difficulties but Waugh is right to suggest that, actually, a minority Tory ministry could probably pass a good deal of legislation
As a coda to this response to John O’Sullivan’s response to this post it really isn’t the case that the Conservatives are doing badly. Not only may Cameron beat Labout by the same margin – in terms of the popular vote – that Mrs Thatcher triumphed by in 1979 (seven points) but his triumph will
My thanks to John O’Sullivan for his response to my post on Friday. A post that was so “well hidden” (as he puts it) that it was the top post for four hours and on my blog’s front-page all weekend. I’m grateful too that he sees fit to remind me that the current electoral set-up
This is, I’m afraid, a real question and one to which the answer would appear to be no. Today’s text comes courtesy of John Rentoul and his colleague at the Independent on Sunday, Jane Merrick. On the matter of voting reform here’s what David Cameron has to say: JM: Is it true you once said
As a person rather than as a politician, I mean. David has already mentioned Clegg’s taste for Germanic* classical music and now there’s another reason to approve of him. He’s a Beckett fan. If he comes out for cricket and Wodehouse, his party can have my vote… Here he is on Sam: Every time I
Earlier today I took issue with John O’Sullivan’s take on this election but do not let it be said that his views are the only odd ones available at National Review. Here’s Dennis Boyles: I’m sure all good Tories wish Cameron well. But one could argue that a Cameron win might be the worst of
As so it has come to pass: even the Guardian has abandoned Labour and endorsed the Liberal Democrats. I expect the Independent will do the same and that the Mirror may be the only (London) blatt to support Gordon Brown. Meanwhile and for the first time since 1992 the Times is backing the Tories. Perhaps
In the midst of a piece asking where disillusioned Labour supporters will go – apparently UKIP will be a beneficiary – John O’Sullivan writes: That said, the main underlying truth of this campaign — freshened up by this latest development — is that the Tories ought to be winning easily and by a landslide. That
Last October I suggested that if Labour wanted to find a caretaker leader they could do much worse than appoint Alistair Darling to the job. Granted, there were a couple of difficulties with this notion: Darling is Scottish and there is no party of Darling or interest that will swing behind him. Well he can’t
This was hardly a vintage debate even if it is increasingly clear that these men have little regard for one another and that both Cameron and, especially, Brown are irritated by Nick Clegg’s stickability. This was actually Clegg’s weakest performance. After a good start and the best of the opening statements, Clegg’s performance was less
International readers – and Britishers without televisions – can watch the third and final Prime Ministerial Debate here:
It can be a risky business, this game. There’s always the temptation to produce some counterintuitive theory that, generally speaking, is too bleedin’ clever by half. And the more everyone else says black is white so it’s tempting to write that, actually, it’s red. So, as we await the third and final leaders’ debate this
Ben Brogan accepts Labour’s challenge to judge Gordon on substance not style and, unsurprisingly, finds him wanting. But in his critique he also includes this: On the substance of the constitution, he gerrymandered new bodies that turned on Labour and undermined the union. What on earth is he talking about? What are these bodies, how