To me it demonstrates the mastery of the ruling class at strategy. Just the ticket when you plan to want to rule something as complicated as a country!
Seriously, I'm completely apolitical, but this one is probably one of the worst strategic blunder, ever. Oh, perhaps that and Cameron's brexit gamble.
And it feels exactly like that; they are just gambling with the future of the country, repeatedly, with just petty objectives and personal power in play.
And it's on pretty much every sides of the political landscape, it's feels to me (as an adult) like a watching a gang of 10 years old all trying to pull on a rag, only difference being that we live on the rag :-)
This election shows once again how terrible the FPTP voting system is. The Tories gained like 41% of the vote, but 48% of the seats. And this is a "better" outcome than it would've been in the U.S., where you also have other high arbitrary thresholds for third-parties, and the media virtually ignores them throughout the year-long election cycles.
If the Tories had 41% of the seats (per the number of votes they received) and Labor 40%, it would've been much easier to form a majority with Labor. Now that seems unlikely, even though all parties should see that the Tories are in rapid decline in the voters' eyes, and they shouldn't attach themselves to the Conservative party in any way.
It's a real shame the Tories killed ranked choice voting (alternative voting) in 2011. I would have still preferred a proportional representation system, but RCV would've been a definite improvement over FPTP, too.
It's also an even bigger shame that the Liberals in Canada decided to betray their voters and back-down on moving away from the FPTP voting system, which was one of their biggest campaign promises in the last election. With the risk of getting the Conservatives back in power in Canada, I hope the Canadian voters punish them hard in the next election (by voting NDP or Green), because such betrayal must not be rewarded.
Canada could have finally moved away from the the undemocratic FPTP voting system, but the Liberals decided it may be better to stick to the undemocratic voting system if it means they can just switch places with Conservatives and dominate the government every 1-2 elections, as it happens in the United States with the Democratic and Republican parties.
What does this mean for Brexit? If Theresa May is kicked out, can/will it be declawed? Can it be reversed?
Also, can someone explain to me the steps by which parties in Britain create coalitions (or whatever) and then put a new PM in place? I'm an American, so any reference to American politics is super helpful.
The thing about brexit was that the UK was already enjoying a lot of privileges and leeway in regards to their participation in the EU - they didn't participate on the agricultural subsidising fund, they didn't have to covert to Euro, etc, setting them apart and ahead of the other EU countries.
I'm quite positive that the remaining powers of the EU, starting with Germany and France are actually delighted at leveling the playing field and harmonising the EU commitment for the remaining members.
So if the UK wants back in the EU, they will certainly be welcome with the open arms, but without any of the special deals and privileges that UK has enjoyed.
If only for this reason and Brexit was a terrible mistake.
There's only two parties - Lib Dems & Greens - which promised a chance to revert Brexit, so I wouldn't expect it to be reversed. A softer Brexit is certainly on the cards though.
This guide [0] from the BBC might help to understand how coalitions are formed. It's currently looking very tricky as the splits are crazy [1].
Unlikely to be reversed but it's a big slowdown and uncertainty for the whole Brexit process which was due to start already next week I believe.
But on the bright side (for us in the rest of EU) it's also more likely to result in a "softer" brexit, if the election result is seen as a vote against May's Conservative plan.
That said, whoever replaces May - once she has been eaten by the Tory backbenchers - is likely to have been an original Brexit backer, which May was not. For example Boris Johnson. So it's all very uncertain at this point.
Edit: Was unsure about the exact date of negotiations -
they were set to start on june 19th but it's uncertain if it can now.
Someone actually created a throwaway account to deliver a salty (now removed) comment that I should shut up if I didn't know what I was talking about - referring to "I believe.." in my original comment. Otherwise this would "Turn into reddit".
Parliament has already voted yes on Brexit, and formal communication was already sent to the EU. According to Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty the UK now has less than 2 years to negotiate the terms of its exit.
I don't think the process can be reversed but there is certainly a lot of leeway in how it will happen.
Tusk has said A50 can be cancelled. Irrespective of the correct legal interpretation, I think if the UK government wanted out of Brexit, they'd get it. This is still a pretty unlikely scenario, but not impossible.
I'm putting that qualification in because, frankly, no-one knows the answer since it's never been put to a court. Moreover, I don't think it will matter. What will matter is whether or not the political will exists to make it happen.
The UK has a first-past-the-post system designed explicitly to stop coalitions.
For the next few weeks the winning party will negotiate with the other parties and try to create a coalition. If that fails they can either try a minority government or a new election will be called.
This time around a coalition will be hard, the third party (Lib Dems) went into a coalition with the Tories in 2010. It almost destroyed them as a party so they won't do it again.
Great question! Brexit negotiations are due to start in 11 days yet we do not have a party with a clear mandate (the purpose of the election in the first place). This is an omnishambles given the Brexit clock is already ticking and the UK's position has weakened significantly. The EU must be quaking in its boots regarding the upcoming negotiations!
The main thing with Brexit is that the British people had a referendum about it which decided the matter. The elected politicans need to follow that direction. So it's unlikely that it can be reverted without damaging the system of UK democracy.
The lib Dems wanted a second referendum about what it would mean, I think, e.g. soft Vs hard.
So it can't really be reversed but the angle can be changed as that has always been unclear.
Someone closer to the UK than me mind explaining why SNP lost so many seats, including several that seemed pretty safe? I thought that Scottish nationalism was on the rise after Brexit, with many people there wanting to remain within the EU. Why the sudden shift to the Tories there?
What an absolute mess. It really just again demonstrates that the country is divided right down the middle - inward vs. outward, young vs. old, nationalist vs. unionist.
Nobody is coming out of this well, and I think it's virtually certain that there will be another general election in short order - but I don't really expect the outcome to be much different.
I guess this is what happens when parties move apart like that. Corbyn's Labour have shifted quite far to the left, while the Conservatives have turned completely inward. There's a huge gap in the middle, and unfortunately our electoral system leaves little hope of filling it.
Didn't the conservatives face an impossible situation anyway?
Hence all the resignations after Brexit? Is this, with the missed debates, possibly just an attempt to sit out a tough round of governing?
I'm starting to wonder whether this is a possible ploy by the Tories to sit out of what could be a disastrous spell in politics, given that Corbyn will likely pursue Brexit if he becomes PM.
I like Corbyn, and I think he's done tremendously with a great manifesto, but it still remains to be seen if he can lead a country. He's in his element in an election, as he's been a campaigner and an activist throughout his career. It might make more sense to ignore the DUP, and to allow Labour to try and form a progressive alliance, hoping that the economy will falter under Brexit and a coalition government.
The BBC feed says: "There's still no result in Kensington, west London, after two recounts. The Conservatives say they'll keep calling for recounts until they are denied any more, rather than concede, the BBC understands. As such, there's going to be a third recount, which is either going to take place this afternoon or tomorrow..."
What's that about? On the face of it it seems so childishly spiteful that I feel I must be missing some strategic consideration.
It actually occurred in the 1910s that there was 1 (One!) vote in an area. If its as close as that, there is significant benefit to recounting, as any result that tips the balance could tip the balance of some later votes given the tories lack of a majority
> On the face of it it seems so childishly spiteful that I feel I must be missing some strategic consideration.
Probably hoping one of the recounts comes out in their favor, at which point the other side will ask for a recount. Probably childish and spiteful also.
Man, it's been a bad time for Conservative mandates, hasn't it? Wasn't the Brexit vote set up by a Conservative prime minister to prove that Britain wanted to remain in the EU?
Yes, exactly - two spectacular demonstrations of misjudging the room.
Cameron paid with his job... and with the economy of the UK by the looks of it (yes, I live in the UK) after mis-judging the sentiment in the country (and telling us that he had got a 'new deal' with the EU, which was no such thing). The question is whether May will as well. She's saying 'no' to leaving this morning, but I don't see how her position is tenable, given that her 'strong and stable' concept is looking anything but after last night.
no. michael gove and boris johnson tried to use euroskepticism within the conservative party to strip cameron of the leadership. the referendum was a play by cameron to shut down the euroskeptics and sideline johnson/gove
none of gove, johnson or cameron thought the leave side had any chance of actually winning which is why all three of them bailed in the wake of the vote
I hope the influence of the DUP in Belfast will at least put us on a footing to get immigration and borders sorted more quickly. Those factors will have the greatest effect on tech companies.
Honestly the idea of the DUP having actual power in Westminster scares me. They are even more conservative then the Conservatives, especially about social issues.
The result is quite ironic. It was supposed to be a 'bloodbath' for the conservatives and the extreme right. It looks like the left/hard left got the young out to vote.
This is largely a vote against austerity and possibly also against globalisation. I would hope that this also translates to a more moderate brexit.
I would really have loved to have been a fly on the wall when this decision was discussed. Maybe someone from the U.K. can explain why, if you have a majority and outright control of Parliament, that you might necessarily need to extend that majority?
I am not British nor familiar with British politics. Is there any article that tries to explain the reasons behind what happened? Labours were something like 20% behind when the vote was called, but went close to winning yesterday.
Anecdote - There wasn't any particular party that I wanted to vote for. My vote was against the Tories in protest of having to give up essential liberties for a bit of temporary safety.
Last season of House of Cards is dangerously close to reality this time.
In US, Trump might loose his presidency. UK is a mess, based on wrong political decisions.
I still wonder "Who is Frank Underwood and what does he win from all of this".
There is nothing unusual about a political scandal, but this time is obvious that the elite is quite power-driven and the society is nothing more than a voting variable in their equation.
The degree of access to the EU market. Which is effectively a tradeoff of access to market for sovereignty. Ie if you implement all EU laws (even though you have no say on them), you are EU compatible and will be given access. That's basically where Norway is. There are legitimate concerns of which is worse between loosing sovereignty over loosing the single market access.
Weak = become like Norway or Switzerland; technically not in the EU, but bound to many of its treaties. Get you the benefits of, say, open borders, but also means paying for, say, saving the banking system and (almost) accepting whatever new rules the 'real' EU counties come up with (because it got exemptions for lots of EU regulations, Great Britain currently is almost less of a EU member than Switzerland, so it probably wouldn't go that far)
Strong = break all ties with the EU. No open market, border controls everywhere (including the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland) but also no more payments to the EU, and having the freedom to, say, create import tariffs for German cars.
common market access and freedom of movement, mostly. a hard brexit means (potentially) sacrificing the former to reject the latter. a soft brexit means conceding freedom of movement to ensure continuity of economy
edit: I know they're Unionist and eurosceptic, my understanding was that they were also for a single Ireland inside the UK and therefore would want a soft Brexit with an open Irish border. Thanks for correcting me on that however.
----------
There is no possible outcome here for the Tories that works towards a strong Brexit. The most likely coalition partner - the DUP - is all about a unified Ireland. Brexit is driving a major wedge into Ireland's border, so they will undermine that at every turn.
Expect a revote in a couple of weeks. This outcome leaves no one in a position to govern strongly and that directly weakens the UK's position in Brexit talks.
Northern Ireland person here, I'm afraid you have it backwards. The DUP is strongly opposed to a united Ireland, and (until very recently) have supported a border of some description with Ireland.
Sinn Fein are for a united Ireland, but do not take up their seats in Westminster.
The DUP have obtained 10 seats in this election (Sinn Fein have 7), and a coalition between the Conservatives and the DUP looks likely. The DUP has been bigger supporters of the Conservatives, and of Brexit.
[+] [-] buserror|8 years ago|reply
Seriously, I'm completely apolitical, but this one is probably one of the worst strategic blunder, ever. Oh, perhaps that and Cameron's brexit gamble.
And it feels exactly like that; they are just gambling with the future of the country, repeatedly, with just petty objectives and personal power in play.
And it's on pretty much every sides of the political landscape, it's feels to me (as an adult) like a watching a gang of 10 years old all trying to pull on a rag, only difference being that we live on the rag :-)
Ok, rambling over. it's friday! :-)
[+] [-] da_n|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] HalfwayToDice|8 years ago|reply
The Conservatives Won The Election
They will be ruling for 5 years, in a coalition with the even more conservative DUP.
Labour/progressives are out of power for at least another 5 years.
I know it's a bucket of cold water, but I think people aren't facing up to reality after Corbyn did much much better than expected. But he still lost.
[+] [-] mtgx|8 years ago|reply
If the Tories had 41% of the seats (per the number of votes they received) and Labor 40%, it would've been much easier to form a majority with Labor. Now that seems unlikely, even though all parties should see that the Tories are in rapid decline in the voters' eyes, and they shouldn't attach themselves to the Conservative party in any way.
It's a real shame the Tories killed ranked choice voting (alternative voting) in 2011. I would have still preferred a proportional representation system, but RCV would've been a definite improvement over FPTP, too.
https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/6g6e5d/half_...
It's also an even bigger shame that the Liberals in Canada decided to betray their voters and back-down on moving away from the FPTP voting system, which was one of their biggest campaign promises in the last election. With the risk of getting the Conservatives back in power in Canada, I hope the Canadian voters punish them hard in the next election (by voting NDP or Green), because such betrayal must not be rewarded.
Canada could have finally moved away from the the undemocratic FPTP voting system, but the Liberals decided it may be better to stick to the undemocratic voting system if it means they can just switch places with Conservatives and dominate the government every 1-2 elections, as it happens in the United States with the Democratic and Republican parties.
[+] [-] peterlk|8 years ago|reply
Also, can someone explain to me the steps by which parties in Britain create coalitions (or whatever) and then put a new PM in place? I'm an American, so any reference to American politics is super helpful.
[+] [-] ddalex|8 years ago|reply
I'm quite positive that the remaining powers of the EU, starting with Germany and France are actually delighted at leveling the playing field and harmonising the EU commitment for the remaining members.
So if the UK wants back in the EU, they will certainly be welcome with the open arms, but without any of the special deals and privileges that UK has enjoyed.
If only for this reason and Brexit was a terrible mistake.
[+] [-] gideonparanoid|8 years ago|reply
This guide [0] from the BBC might help to understand how coalitions are formed. It's currently looking very tricky as the splits are crazy [1].
[0] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40209087
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2017/jun...
[+] [-] alkonaut|8 years ago|reply
But on the bright side (for us in the rest of EU) it's also more likely to result in a "softer" brexit, if the election result is seen as a vote against May's Conservative plan.
That said, whoever replaces May - once she has been eaten by the Tory backbenchers - is likely to have been an original Brexit backer, which May was not. For example Boris Johnson. So it's all very uncertain at this point.
Edit: Was unsure about the exact date of negotiations - they were set to start on june 19th but it's uncertain if it can now.
Someone actually created a throwaway account to deliver a salty (now removed) comment that I should shut up if I didn't know what I was talking about - referring to "I believe.." in my original comment. Otherwise this would "Turn into reddit".
Someone is having a bad morning.
[+] [-] trosi|8 years ago|reply
I don't think the process can be reversed but there is certainly a lot of leeway in how it will happen.
[+] [-] moomin|8 years ago|reply
I'm putting that qualification in because, frankly, no-one knows the answer since it's never been put to a court. Moreover, I don't think it will matter. What will matter is whether or not the political will exists to make it happen.
[+] [-] radicalbyte|8 years ago|reply
For the next few weeks the winning party will negotiate with the other parties and try to create a coalition. If that fails they can either try a minority government or a new election will be called.
This time around a coalition will be hard, the third party (Lib Dems) went into a coalition with the Tories in 2010. It almost destroyed them as a party so they won't do it again.
[+] [-] kefabean|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PhasmaFelis|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thinkingemote|8 years ago|reply
The lib Dems wanted a second referendum about what it would mean, I think, e.g. soft Vs hard.
So it can't really be reversed but the angle can be changed as that has always been unclear.
[+] [-] nostrademons|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] matthewmacleod|8 years ago|reply
Nobody is coming out of this well, and I think it's virtually certain that there will be another general election in short order - but I don't really expect the outcome to be much different.
I guess this is what happens when parties move apart like that. Corbyn's Labour have shifted quite far to the left, while the Conservatives have turned completely inward. There's a huge gap in the middle, and unfortunately our electoral system leaves little hope of filling it.
[+] [-] brownbat|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] EnderMB|8 years ago|reply
I like Corbyn, and I think he's done tremendously with a great manifesto, but it still remains to be seen if he can lead a country. He's in his element in an election, as he's been a campaigner and an activist throughout his career. It might make more sense to ignore the DUP, and to allow Labour to try and form a progressive alliance, hoping that the economy will falter under Brexit and a coalition government.
[+] [-] PhasmaFelis|8 years ago|reply
What's that about? On the face of it it seems so childishly spiteful that I feel I must be missing some strategic consideration.
[+] [-] cjg|8 years ago|reply
Presumably if there is only one vote in it, it's well worth checking carefully, especially if recounts have different counts.
[+] [-] RugnirViking|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] flukus|8 years ago|reply
Probably hoping one of the recounts comes out in their favor, at which point the other side will ask for a recount. Probably childish and spiteful also.
[+] [-] gideonparanoid|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PhasmaFelis|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] djaychela|8 years ago|reply
Cameron paid with his job... and with the economy of the UK by the looks of it (yes, I live in the UK) after mis-judging the sentiment in the country (and telling us that he had got a 'new deal' with the EU, which was no such thing). The question is whether May will as well. She's saying 'no' to leaving this morning, but I don't see how her position is tenable, given that her 'strong and stable' concept is looking anything but after last night.
[+] [-] querulous|8 years ago|reply
none of gove, johnson or cameron thought the leave side had any chance of actually winning which is why all three of them bailed in the wake of the vote
[+] [-] robk|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theBobBob|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tkyjonathan|8 years ago|reply
This is largely a vote against austerity and possibly also against globalisation. I would hope that this also translates to a more moderate brexit.
[+] [-] Simulacra|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] giomasce|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] knopkop|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] IshKebab|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] esolyt|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alkonaut|8 years ago|reply
So if LibDem/DUP and others refuse to even passively back either Labour or Conservatives then what?
[+] [-] drinchev|8 years ago|reply
In US, Trump might loose his presidency. UK is a mess, based on wrong political decisions.
I still wonder "Who is Frank Underwood and what does he win from all of this".
There is nothing unusual about a political scandal, but this time is obvious that the elite is quite power-driven and the society is nothing more than a voting variable in their equation.
[+] [-] PhasmaFelis|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cm2187|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Someone|8 years ago|reply
Weak = become like Norway or Switzerland; technically not in the EU, but bound to many of its treaties. Get you the benefits of, say, open borders, but also means paying for, say, saving the banking system and (almost) accepting whatever new rules the 'real' EU counties come up with (because it got exemptions for lots of EU regulations, Great Britain currently is almost less of a EU member than Switzerland, so it probably wouldn't go that far)
Strong = break all ties with the EU. No open market, border controls everywhere (including the border between Ireland and Northern Ireland) but also no more payments to the EU, and having the freedom to, say, create import tariffs for German cars.
[+] [-] danmaz74|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] querulous|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] matthewmacleod|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] peterbraden|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chris__butters|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] NamTaf|8 years ago|reply
----------
There is no possible outcome here for the Tories that works towards a strong Brexit. The most likely coalition partner - the DUP - is all about a unified Ireland. Brexit is driving a major wedge into Ireland's border, so they will undermine that at every turn.
Expect a revote in a couple of weeks. This outcome leaves no one in a position to govern strongly and that directly weakens the UK's position in Brexit talks.
[+] [-] egeekuk|8 years ago|reply
Sinn Fein are for a united Ireland, but do not take up their seats in Westminster.
The DUP have obtained 10 seats in this election (Sinn Fein have 7), and a coalition between the Conservatives and the DUP looks likely. The DUP has been bigger supporters of the Conservatives, and of Brexit.
[+] [-] Newky|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Gupie|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kolp|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DoctorNick|8 years ago|reply