23.2 C
New York
HomeHeadlineDecoding the UK Elections: Triumphs, Troubles, and Transformations

Decoding the UK Elections: Triumphs, Troubles, and Transformations

Party headquarters can read election results better than political scientists, journalists, or public opinion researchers. They are always in the field, have organizations, and can compare the past with the present. They are in constant contact with voters and do not gauge the pulse only during elections like others.

The votes received, their proportion to the total, the difference from the previous election, and what concrete results they produce are important. Election analysis cannot be done independently of these factors. The recent elections in the UK provide excellent data on this subject, encompassing both positive and negative aspects of free and fair elections.

Positive Aspects:

The government does not hesitate to take the country to elections in every political impasse (even if it will lose). Rishi Sunak decided on an election on July 4, even though he had until the end of the year. It was certain he would lose; only the magnitude of the defeat was unknown.

The country’s readiness for elections at any moment and the establishment of polling stations within 40 days show that democratic institutions work smoothly.

Elections are traditionally held on Thursdays to avoid a drop in turnout if they coincide with holidays. As soon as the polls close, the ‘exit poll’ is announced, and these data, with slight deviations, provide the election result. This time was no different. According to the exit poll, the Labour Party was projected to win 410 seats; when the results were finalized, they won 412.

The current prime minister returned the mandate to the King the morning after the election, and the Labour Party leader was immediately tasked with forming the government. Within a few hours, he announced his cabinet. Look at that speed!

There was no accusation of fraud, nor did such a thought occur to anyone. It was a demonstration of tremendous democratic maturity and experience.

Negative Aspects:

The UK uses a single-member district system. The country is divided into 650 constituencies for 650 MPs. The candidate with the most votes in each district is elected. While this sounds good in theory, in practice, it forces a two or two-and-a-half-party system. Despite many parties and candidates in each district, the candidates of the two main parties essentially compete, with the third candidate’s chance being entirely situational.

This time, “Mr. Conjuncture” overturned election mathematics.

The Labour Party secured 412 seats with 34% of the vote. In other words, by receiving one-third of the votes, they gained a two-thirds majority in Parliament.

Compared to the previous election, their votes decreased by more than half a million; they couldn’t maintain their existing votes, let alone steal votes from the ruling party. Even the party leader, Keir Starmer, lost 17% of the vote in his own district.

So how did they come to power with an overwhelming majority in Parliament?

Because the Conservative Party suffered the heaviest defeat in its history. They lost over 7 million votes, dropping 251 seats to 121.

Their voters did not go to the polls, and those who did chose Reform Party of Brexit architect Nigel Farage or independents to avoid voting for the Labour Party. The Reform Party, however, only managed to win 5 seats with 14% of the vote. This is because Labour voters in Conservative strongholds voted for Liberal Democrat candidates. Despite losing votes compared to the previous election, the Liberal Democrats won 72 seats.

In the UK, votes that do not translate into parliamentary representation have no value. If there were justice in representation, the Reform Party, which received more votes than the Liberals, should have won at least 90 seats.


These rough figures alone show that things are not going well. The new prime minister, Keir Starmer, knows this best.

Not only in the UK, but in most countries, the cost of living has increased to a frightening level. Qualified and skilled personnel are migrating to more favorable countries. Young people cannot dream of a future; they have fallen behind even the modest standards of their parents. There are major disruptions in basic services such as health, education, and transportation. Austerity policies have reached their end. People are fed up with promises. There is no longer any belief that problems can be solved, and the gap is chronically widening.

Politics and the media blame immigrants, directing society’s anger there, but these arguments are weak and unrealistic.

We are on the eve of major changes and transformations. However, this time, even those in charge do not know where things are headed.

Take a second to support Politurco.com on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!

Most Popular

Recent Comments