Who will win the UK election ?

N1AK

Prediction: Conservatives will get the most seats. Combined with the Liberals they will have ~310 seats. They will not have more MPs than Labour + SNP and thus will not be able to form a viable coalition.

Labour will get something like 265 seats. This will put Labour + Liberals on the borderline of a workable minority government if the SNP doesn't oppose them. It would be such a fragile hold, and be seen as unjust by the electorate, so I think Ed should (and may well) decide not to form a minority government.

I think there is a real chance that we'll see another election after neither main party forms a minority government.

IveSeenTheLight

If Con/ Dems get 310 seats and Labour 265,
then Con / Dems and Labour / SNP would be very similar.

Could you have a Labour / Lib Dem minority coalition, backed up by SNP on a vote by vote basis?

michaels

I think Labour will get more seats than the Tories and so all these questions about 'legitimacy' will not come into play. The question beign whether labour will need a formal coalition with the LDs to command a majority of the house on the majority of votes on which the SNP will abstain or will be able to govern alone.

zagfles

N1AK wrote: »

Prediction: Conservatives will get the most seats. Combined with the Liberals they will have ~310 seats. They will not have more MPs than Labour + SNP and thus will not be able to form a viable coalition.

Labour will get something like 265 seats. This will put Labour + Liberals on the borderline of a workable minority government if the SNP doesn't oppose them. It would be such a fragile hold, and be seen as unjust by the electorate, so I think Ed should (and may well) decide not to form a minority government.

I think there is a real chance that we'll see another election after neither main party forms a minority government.

What would be the point of another election unless opinion has significantly changed? What if the next election delivered the same result? It happened in 1974 but then the Tories and Labour were far more dominant and a hung parliament was a freak result, like a coin landing on it's side. So it was much more likely that a second election would give one or other a majority. The situation is completely different now.

Politicians just have to get on with what the people decide, !!!!!!! Labour and the Tories aren't that far apart, they should have their heads banging together and work together. Not necessarily a coalition, but perhaps a minority govt with a C&S agreement where the opposition can tame the more extreme policies of the govt but support them on the uncontroversial stuff. Which if you believe their manifestos, is most of it.

Yes it'll upset all the tribal simpletons who'll scream "treachery", but who cares. A Labour govt tamed by the Tories or vv would likely be a better govt than a majority for either. Just like this govt was better with the LibDem in it.

IveSeenTheLight

zagfles wrote: »

What would be the point of another election unless opinion has significantly changed? What if the next election delivered the same result?

I've not heard anything this campaign to convince me to change, hence, I'd still vote the same.

If no government was able to be formed, they surely would need to form a rainbow coalition / government and constitute a move towards proper PR, not that AV crap they offered in 2011

N1AK

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

If Con/ Dems get 310 seats and Labour 265,
then Con / Dems and Labour / SNP would be very similar.

Could you have a Labour / Lib Dem minority coalition, backed up by SNP on a vote by vote basis?

Based on current polls the only way Labour could form a government is with SNP or Liberal assistance. They will need to form a coalition and they will not form it with the SNP. Thus they would form a coalition with the Liberals, then try and come to some arrangement with the SNP not to oppose them (they can't do more than that without very negative political consequences).

N1AK

zagfles wrote: »

What would be the point of another election unless opinion has significantly changed?...

Yes it'll upset all the tribal simpletons who'll scream "treachery", but who cares. A Labour govt tamed by the Tories or vv would likely be a better govt than a majority for either. Just like this govt was better with the LibDem in it.

Regardless of whether it makes sense in terms of governance there will not be a coalition or C&S agreement between the Conservatives and Labour. You can whine about tribal simpletons as much as you like, but just like the Liberals haemorrhaged votes for supporting the conservatives both parties would do the same if they support the other. If Labour agreed to form a government with a conservative prime minister then they'd permanently cease to exist in Scotland, and see an exodus of 20%+ of their voters in England. The same is largely true in the reverse situation.

So the reason we'd have another election is because that's the only thing you can do in our political system if an election leads to a parliament where no viable government can be formed.

zagfles

N1AK wrote: »

Regardless of whether it makes sense in terms of governance there will not be a coalition or C&S agreement between the Conservatives and Labour. You can whine about tribal simpletons as much as you like, but just like the Liberals haemorrhaged votes for supporting the conservatives both parties would do the same if they support the other. If Labour agreed to form a government with a conservative prime minister then they'd permanently cease to exist in Scotland, and see an exodus of 20%+ of their voters in England. The same is largely true in the reverse situation.

So the reason we'd have another election is because that's the only thing you can do in our political system if an election leads to a parliament where no viable government can be formed.

So what if the next election gave the same result? And the one after that? When are the parties going to actually comply the peoples' wishes instead of asking them the same question again and again?

But maybe it would take 3 or 4 elections to make the tribal simpletons realise you do sometimes have to work with people with different opinions and reach a compromise. I hope not.

wotsthat

zagfles wrote: »

What would be the point of another election unless opinion has significantly changed? What if the next election delivered the same result? It happened in 1974 but then the Tories and Labour were far more dominant and a hung parliament was a freak result, like a coin landing on it's side. So it was much more likely that a second election would give one or other a majority. The situation is completely different now.

A different result is quite possible IMO. One factor would be who would be to 'blame' for the lack of stable government? Party leaders would be having a beauty contest to appear the most statesmanlike - slip ups could be fatal. I've not voted yet and still haven't quite made up my mind - I could easily change my mind if I thought some !!!! taking was going on.

Also, it's not difficult to envisage, say, UKIP voters wondering why 10% of the electorate voting for them made the chances of a Labour/ SNP alliance more likely than less.

Jason74

wotsthat wrote: »

A different result is quite possible IMO. One factor would be who would be to 'blame' for the lack of stable government? Party leaders would be having a beauty contest to appear the most statesmanlike - slip ups could be fatal. I've not voted yet and still haven't quite made up my mind - I could easily change my mind if I thought some !!!! taking was going on.

Also, it's not difficult to envisage, say, UKIP voters wondering why 10% of the electorate voting for them made the chances of a Labour/ SNP alliance more likely than less.

Indeed. There is also perhaps one other possible outcome if we get a second election due to parliament being not just hung, but hung drawn and quartered!. And that's people starting to see the Lib Dem decision of 2010 in a different light. People criticised them heavily for some of the compromises they made in coalition with the Tories in 2010, but if they see first hand the consequences of the alternative (IE no viable government), then opinions about that decision could be revised.

If that lack of stable Government produces a second election, a party with a proven track record of doing what it takes to produce a stable Government (while also having a valuable and underestimated moderating influence on its senior party) might be a major beneficiary . . . . . .or perhaps I'm giving the electorate too much credit ?