UK elections: Conservatives do much better than expected
It was predicted to be a very close election, too close to call. But that turned out to be a bad prediction, because Conservatives have done very well indeed in the UK election, so well that there will probably be no need to form a coalition government:
The BBC forecast, with 635 of 650 seats declared, is Conservative 331, Labour 232, the Lib Dems 8, the SNP 56, Plaid Cymru 3, UKIP 1, the Greens 1 and others 19.
Parliamentary elections are complex things, and the parties involved are many and various. This makes a majority rather than a coalition government something of a triumph. Prime Minister Cameron defied those who said he could not increase the Conservatives’ lead, and even FiveThirtyEight (Nate Silver’s blog), which was so impressive at calling our own 2012 election, didn’t do so well with the Brits.
Hope this “conservatives do well; better than expected” trend manages to spread to our side of the pond for 2016.
There is a lack of clarity.
Far from perfect result, but best realistic result. Labor is determined to obliterate any signs of Western Civilization. Now we can hope the dynamics change in favor of UKIP before total destruction takes place.
The Lord Ashcroft (conservative) poll was accurate. I wonder if others were inaccurate because they were from leftist sources.
the left NEVER concedes a loss, a claim of a close race is all you ever get as that is what they say when they are losing and trying to get a few more out to the polls.. the we are almost there, and your vote counts game…
constant manipulation and falsehoods with the most common being ommission…
with a society run like that, is it an wonder the soviet union never produced anything the world wanted to buy in 100 years? and that without the west making modern facilities to put people to work, china was the same?
think how japan with 119 million people 1980, no natural resources (per se), and a tiny portion of land, could out produce china by a huge margin, a country with 981 million people, who could not do much of anything to improve their lot, build companies and factories, and get out of what was in many cases, subsistence living with a state that treated them worse than cows are treated (not that peta would care).
Steve Says: I wonder if others were inaccurate because they were from leftist sources.
Do bears take a crap in the woods?
Would a cow lick lots wife?
If your looking for truth from the left you have about as much chance of catching truth as a paper mache dog chasing a steel cat through hades…
I noticed that the “media,” there and here, said the Conservatives “defied the polls.” Probably as close as they could get to saying “We were wrong.”
Judging from a link I just read at Drudge, the London Left is inconsolable and near suicidal in the aftermath. May it be so for the US Lib-Left in November 2016.
I think a major contribution to Labour’s defeat was that they employed David Axelrod to advise on their campaign. He suggested a “fire up the base” approach, without any understanding of what the base might be. So there was an attempt to stir up a war on women theme, with Labour’s Deputy Leader touring the country in a pink bus. Meanwhile as early as last autumn in Glasgow, the basiest part of Labour’s base. Labour politicians could not walk the streets without police escorts to protect them from angry mobs.
U.K. Gamblers Trump Pollsters in Calling Cameron’s Re-Election
Why? the why is the same reason the soviet union never produced much of anything other than some natural resources and war machines.
you hired liberals who feel its their duty to screw around with validity in their favor for the cause…
you would think people would learn
but i think they done learn, they just die and are replaced
I’m not so sanguine about the results. Prime Minister Cameron is no Margaret Thatcher, rather he’s a CINO. The UKIP won ONE seat. Nigel Farage, its leader lost his bid for election. The Labour Party’s decline is deceptive. The Scottish Labour Party (SNP) won 56 seats and is placing nationalism before all else but is otherwise the natural ally of Labour. Which means a ‘deal’ can be cut.
Quite frankly, I see nothing to dissuade me from the conclusion that the Brits have already lost their country. I base that conclusion upon Rotherham with its larger implications, as a society that won’t protect its children… has no future.
Neither Cameron nor his party show any sign of taking the UK’s deepening Islamization seriously.
http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2014/05/03/the-5-latest-signs-of-britains-imminent-demise/?singlepage=true
There is the wrong clarity:
On 1 December 2009, David Cameron said this at the Conservative Muslim Forum Eid Party:
“It’s not enough, as I’ve said many times, for a party like the Conservatives to open the door, and say ‘come on in,’ if all you see is a sea of white Christian faces.
You need to see people from your own communities getting to the top of the army, getting to the top of the legal profession, getting to the top of business and, yes, getting to the top of the Conservative party and politics too.
So the truth is that, if we are going to build that strong, vibrant and inclusive society, we need… many more Muslim men and women at the top of British businesses. Many more Muslim soldiers in the highest level of command. And, of course, more Muslims in our parliament. So there’s not just one Muslim in the cabinet, and one in the shadow cabinet, but British Muslims all across government in positions of leadership and authority.”
What could possibly go wrong?
Whether The People be led by The Lord,
Or lured by the loudest throat:
If it be quicker to die by the sword
Or cheaper to die by vote–
These are things we have dealt with once,
(And they will not rise from their grave)
For Holy People, however it runs,
Endeth in wholly Slave.
— Rudyard Kipling
Found here.
Okay, someone still in thrall to democracy and voting and all that stuff, please explain.
UKIP’s 5 million votes get them 1 seat and SNP’s 1.5 million votes gets them thirty. Am I missing something? Preternaturally beffudled? Missed the memo apprising all concerned the definition of democracy had been changed — again? Terry Thomas knobbled democracy while everyone was laughing?
Conservatives Win Majority… Britain Is Finished Anyway
Cameron’s a disaster for Britain, just the lesser disaster. The Conservative win is a disaster for Britain, just the lesser disaster.
No-Fault Divorce: America’s Divorce Mill [Communist Origin of No-Fault Divorce]
http://catholicexchange.com/no-fault-divorce-americas-divorce-mill
liberals are making a farce of church, family, community, education, economy, personal responsibility, marraige, governments purpose, laws purpose, freedom, etc etc..
the more you dig though, the more you will find EVERY string of this thing is communist and in many cases, connected to the states that created it!!!!
it got so bad for labor that the police had to escort candidates, and that was not enouh to clue them to what they were doing..
now we have a liberal progressive islamic fascist communist in the white house, we now need two rows of spikes to keep people from jumping the fence to the white house…
there was a time there was no fence and people could just walk up and ring the bell… but that was when the born racist whites who ended slavery, gave a seat at the table by invitation, stopped hitler, ended slavery in england and europe, shipped huge amounts of money to help, and so on… now that we did all those good things, we are to be exterminated and hated just as jews in germany were, and our noted open and friendly places, like the white house, resemble prisons, or resemble the gated community in walking dead to keep the zombies out.
George Pal: it is no fault of democracy per se that has returned those results. It is the fault of single-seat ridings and non-transferable votes. UKIP was the second-most popular party in a large number of populous ridings, but because they failed to get a plurality in all but one of those ridings, they only get one MP. On the flip side, SNP was the most popular party in a large number of less populous ridings.
An alternative method of distributing seats in Parliament, such as mixed-member proportional that’s used for the German Bundestag or the New Zealand Parliament, would have minimized this effect. Allowing instant-runoff voting (or Alternative Vote, which the British rejected in a referendum a few years ago) would also have minimized the effect of “strategic voting” and probably would have empowered UKIP at the Tories’ expense in England.
Single-seat ridings and one-man-one-vote can produce pretty distorted results on an electorate-wide level. For an American example: Massachusetts has voted for Republican governors with 48+% of the vote 5 times in the last 25 years. Over that same time, the Massachusetts legislature has (except in 1990) had a Democratic super-majority. Naturally, the legislature has control over redistricting. FairVote.org has a lot of fairly compelling information about potential alternatives to the systems we (and also the Brits, from whom we inherited the system) use now.
Bryan,
Thank you.
it is no fault of democracy per se
Certainly it’s not the victim’s vault, it’s the rapist’s. And democracy is being raped throughout Europe, the EU, the UK, and here. Who would not participate and cast a vote in ‘democracies’ with such clarity of purpose?
You seem to have an insider’s seat. Are ridings ever redrawn as congressional districts are here?
George Pal: I don’t have an insider’s seat, electoral reform is just something that interests me. As far as I know, yes, constituencies are redrawn occasionally. Boundary Commissions for the various countries within the UK (England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland) make recommendations about what the new constituency boundaries should be, and Parliament either adopts them or not. I don’t know who staffs the Boundary Commissions, though.
Geoffrey Britain:
I agree that the British Conservative Party is hardly conservative any more. But it’s certainly more conservative than Labor.
… But it’s certainly more conservative than Labor…
A distinction without a difference.
I agree neo. So instead of Labour’s rush to dhimmitude, the Brits under the Conservative Party will stroll casually along toward that destination.
As G6loq’s Cameron quote makes clear, the Conservative party is deluded.
A suicide by a slow-acting, fatal poison for which there is no cure or antidote has the same final result as putting a gun to one’s head and pulling the trigger.
22 December 2010:
“A survey of 600 Muslim students at 30 universities throughout Britain found that 32 per cent of Muslim respondents believed killing in the name of religion is justified.
A U.S. diplomatic cable from January 2009 quoted a poll by the Centre for Social Cohesion as saying 54 per cent wanted a Muslim party to represent their world view in Parliament and 40 per cent want Muslims in the UK to be under Sharia law.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1340599/WikiLeaks-1-3-British-Muslim-students-killing-Islam-40-want-Sharia-law.html#ixzz3ZZV9Uzzh
BBC Radio (2015): 45% of British Muslims agree* that clerics preaching violence against the West represent “mainstream Islam”.
http://comres.co.uk/polls/bbc-radio-4-today-muslim-poll/
* that is, are willing to admit it, as with the twin Islamic doctrines of taqiyya and muruna, the actual percentage of Muslims who know it to be true but won’t admit it, has to be higher.
Polls show that a greater percentage of Muslims in the UK are ‘radicalized’ than in America. So if; “According to a scholarly survey conducted by David Yerushalmi and Mordechai Kedar for The Middle East Quarterly, approximately 80% of American mosques feature texts advocating diverse forms of violence “in the pursuit of a Shari’a based political order or advocating violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim.” David Solway
… then how much more do mosques in the UK “feature texts advocating diverse forms of violence “in the pursuit of a Shari’a based political order or advocating violent jihad as a duty that should be of paramount importance to a Muslim.”?
It is my contention that as Muslim populations increase they become ever more doctrinal and they do so because the ‘radicals’ hold Islam’s theological ‘high-ground’. Thus, the Muslim moderates have no theological basis upon which to resist the ‘radicals’ faithful understanding of Islam.
The shadow of Tony Blair who had suffered a lot of slings and arrows after Iraq war still in mind of voters in today election.
Scotland, I believe, has been voting Labor for many years. And England votes heavily for Conservatives. This move to the Scotland party or whatever its called is very recent. Cameron’s call for devolution for Scotland in order to grant them greater sovereignty would also apply to Wales, and more interestingly to England. Devolve Scotland and England is locked up for the Conservatives and then they can deal with issues at least those devolved as they wish without having Labor interfere.
Geoffrey Britain said
May 8th, 2015 at 2:23 pm
It is my contention that as Muslim populations increase they become ever more doctrinal
British Muslims make up just under 5% of the overall UK population, half of whom are eligible to vote in May’s general election.
Historically British Muslims have tended to vote for the Labour party. However According to experts, there is a lack of reliable and accurate research about voting patterns among Muslim voters in the UK. many existing studies about Muslim voters used unreliable methodology
Nick Spencer, a researcher at the religious think tankTheos, said “it was unlikely that voters used religious belief to determine their choice of candidate.”
ziv,
Undoubtedly, that is one argument advanced by both the Labour and Conservative parties as proof that any concern with Islamization is motivated by Islamophobia.
Careful what you wish for. Britain’s Cameron is too close to the Boehner/McConnell/Bush ilk. Like the Georges W. and H.W. Bush (or Nixon), they slightly delay the leftists’ destruction but never make a case for conservative principles (as pragmatists they wouldn’t know a principle if they sat on one). In fact, they often deliver the lamb, bound with the cords of compromise, straight into the jaws of the collectivists, who know just how to cash in on “compassionate conservatism.”
The problem with the UK results is that David Cameron is not a conservative in any meaningful sense of the word. In the not so distant past his policies would have been considered extreme leftist, but now in the UK the socialist narrative has become institutionalised and hence the entire media and political class agree on most core issues (which is why they try so desperately to deligitimize UKIP). See the comparisons here
The big loser is George Galloway lost his seat