h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Only afetr hopping into bed after a curry....

Novo

I thought he hopped into bed *for* a Currie

"Bottler Brown"? Dear me, no. Beware of who you believe. No one wanted an election this autumn.

The Lib Dems didn't want it because they know Ming is still a liability, regardless of what they may sat publicly.

The Tories didn't want it because Brown had a really good summer, showing himself to be confident and assured. Whereas Dave had a really bad summer, full party bickering, and running off to France in the middle of the floods. And so they were dubious about their chances.

And Labour didn't want it because, and this may seem a silly point but it's actually serious, it will almost be winter come election day. Cold weather, dark mornings, and darker nights all mean that turnout would, in all likelihood, be significantly down on last time. And last time was not good for Labour, as it reduced their majority considerably. If less of their support turn up then they could lose. There is a reason that most of our election days are in late spring / early summer. More people are likely to vote then than in winter.

So why did Dave call for Gordon to name a date? Because if Gordon then called an election, then Dave could claim that he kicked it off by asking for one in the first place. And as Gordon wouldn't want to give Dave that head start, he would be unlikely to call said election. Which admittedly means that the Tories can use this 'Bottler Brown' nametag because he didn't call the election they didn't want, but that's the lesser of two evils.


Geggs

Geggs, reasoned points like that which don't vilify at least one political party aren't welcome on h2g2. You know that!

Dogster >

"I mean, just don't have the possibility of the government losing a majority halfway through."

Ah but that isn't possible if you have a ocnstituency based system electing on the basis of "First Past The Post", regardless of whether or not it is constitutional I am afraid at least a couple of MPs a statistally gaurenteed to die in a 4 or 5 year parliament.

And changing the election system is probably *way* more controversial that fixed terms methinks...

Surely if we had a fixed 5 year term system, we'd have to change the whole system. All the checks and balances that have evolved in our parliamentary system involving the potential possibility of an election at any time would have to change. The way business is conducted in parliament involving the way things are voted for would start to become much less important. The whips and all the management of government wouldn't have the same pressure on it, if there was no fear of the government falling. I predict muddle and incompetance quickly becoming the norm.

In the US the individual head of state the president has much more power invested in him than our PM. He has to constantly battle with congress to get things through. So a fixed term makes more sense because he often of a different party to the majority in Congress.

< I predict muddle and incompetance quickly becoming the norm. >

And they aren't under the present system?

Yes, but better the devil you know, eh?

Geggs,

The other side of the coin of course is that with a 12 point lead at the end of Summer, Bottler fancied his chance of an early result because he knows one, he's been winging the hail fellow, I'm British, no spin, new policy, non flash Gordan and two, the economic chickens are going to start coming home to roost. His chickens by the way.

There might not be a better time than now. So off go Bottlers loyal little helpers, Balls, Alexander and Livermore to spin the possibility of a November election. This despite wiser council from the Greybeards, Straw, Hoon and Darling.

Then disaster Dave had a good conference and the Tories came up with some new, popular policies. Flash Gordan's wizzy idea of spinning troop numbers in Iraq, during the Tory conference, goes pear shape big time. Old trick, announce the same figures twice, and do it before you make a Commons statement. Spinning with troops' family emotions. Disgraceful.

Result, polls in marginals show Dave ahead by anything up to six points. Bottle gone, deny everything, even to the political journalists. Watch it all begin to unravel.

I don't want to be too rude to a thorough going Tory like you, WA. But I'm starting to think the style of your posts on this thread and the other one I started, is making you look just a wee bit silly.

Err... please explain a tad more as the silly season is over.

Put simply you see certainties when others see possibilities. I doubt theres any event that you wouldn't see as detrimental to GB.

Whereas the New Labour supporters can always see possibilities in DC's ideas ?

Novo

Course they do Novo. They nick them quick enough after all. What's Alistair Darling saying about Inheritance Tax now?

Fair point. I'm as incapable of being objective about ing Tories as WA is of being objective about GB but Tories deserve it

I prefer to offer opinions based on observation and evidence rather than political cant.

Actually yes I think most of us probably could to a degree, Novo. But the problem always is that we like also to look at the evidence of history of what happens when the Tories are actually in power. (We Labour people are an intelligent bunch you know). So forgive us for being just a tad amused and cynical about Tory bluster and blather.

Of course you're objective, just those who disagree with you who aren't

Though on the Today program last week several good, reasoned, and overall constitutional arguments against calling an election at the moment were given by one John Major.

I've already mentioned one of his points, that of the low turn out in winter elections. Though he reasoned it as low turnout equals reduced mandate. Given that voting in summer elections is now close to 50%, if it dipped below that in a winter election, then whoever won could scarcely claim to be the country's choice.

Another point he made is that historically new, mid-term PMs have either gone to the country immediately, to secure a mandate, or after about 18 months or so, once that have proved that they can do the job. Going to the country after, what is it now, 3 months? Just wasn't viable in his view.

So, if you want to include a few more young turks who didn't really think it though, then there's a number on the shadow front bench worth naming.


Geggs

Ah - the evidence of history. Good stuff that.

10 years of Thatcher - two conflicts.

Blair arrives - "Ours is the first generation that can live free of the threat of conflict" or some such guff.

Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Iraq, Afghanistan