With the election less than 48 hours away a lot of commentators and political movers and shakers will be turning their thoughts to what happens on Friday. There are still too many unknowns to have any certainty about the result but we can be fairly sure that as a result of this election campaign there will be lots of inquests and changes to the way the parties plan and run elections in the future.
There is no question that the biggest change of the lot has been the rise in popularity of Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats. Having a thiord party level pegging with the other two parties has turned the election upside down. Previously David Cameron thought, as did most Tory supporters, that after thirteen years of Labour and the last few years of Gordon Brown it was their turn to be in charge with a majority of seats in Parliament even though that might mean only a quarter of the electorate actually voted for them.
First past the post works because people have little choice. When you get fed up with one lot you can vote for the other. Whether you actually support the other lot has never been considered important and each party, when elected, has always claimed it as a mandate from the electorate even though it is clearly nothing of the sort. Elections have almost always been won by the party the electorate dislike the least. Now things have changed and people do have a choice. If the Tories succeed in forming the next government they will find it hard to resist the calls for electoral reform. The public may be unsure on what changes need to be made but there is overwhelming support for a fairer and more just electoral system.
Whoever loses will be sure to face some tough questions about policies, campaigning and the strategic decisions that were taken. It seems unlikely David Cameron would be challenged even if he fails to achieve outright victory as he has helped the Tories get to a position they haven’t been able to approach for a dozen years. Nick Clegg can hardly be criticised for anything at all. He has run a superbly successful campaign that seems to have put the Liberal Democrats firmly on the electoral map. Some will complain about all the talk of deals and coalitions but much of the talk has been led by the media and he has merely reacted to events and questions asked of him.
The Labour party can be expected to do a great deal of soul searching. Many may feel that after 13 years of power they would start out this election on the back foot but a lot of voters just don’t like Gordon Brown. There may be many reasons for this and one, not seen discussed in this election, is the fact that he represents a constituancy not affected by much of the law laid down in Parliament since the Scottish Parliament decides on several key areas what happens in Scotland.
Labour need to look at how they chose to elect someone who was so unpopular with the voters. They need to look at their whole leader election process and question how they could put someone so unpopular into the most powerful office in the country. The public need to think about this too. Is it right that a small group of people can choose who leads the country when we are supposed to have a democracy. It is more than possible that if Labour had elected someone else as their leader we might be facing a very different election result on Thursday. No-one will ever know what might have been but there have been many people within the Labour party in Parliament who have made no secret of their lack of enthusiasm for Gordon Brown.
If the polls are accurate it looks like the result could be a devestating blow to the Labour party and many will say it all turned thanks to their choice of leader.
Related posts: