The viewpoint of the guardian on the conservatives in the crisis: a contraction party without purpose Editorial
R.The Conservative Party has prepared to strike in the local elections next week, and the conversation has already turned into possible agreements with Report UK. It is an old topic granted by the new momentum by the revelation in which Robert Jenrrick, Minister of Justice shadow, discussed the possibilities of “coalition” to “unifying the right” at a meeting of the Conservative Party activists last month.
Whether it means an official deal or some more flexible alignment, there is a clear electoral logical basis for the proposal. But its general support is still taboo in a party that sees itself as the natural ruling authority in Britain, and sometimes only forced to reside in the opposition.
The Conservative Party does not want to share power, however, as a party from third place in opinion polls, they have no clear alternative path to winning. In many electoral districts, the shares of conservative and reform votes in the recent elections exceeded the majority of the victorious work candidate. The basic account makes gossip around alliances.
Calculating and complementarity from the agreement is more complicated than just adding two numbers. There is a very large ideological overlap between repair and decoration platforms, but their potential support does not come from a group of switch voters.
There are people whose confidence in the Conservative Party is irreversibly broken and who are attracted to Nigel Faraj because it represents a rupture of the old parties’ regime. The reform leader does not have any incentive to indulge in talking about a tactical alliance that would only reduce his trademark as the Westminster Foundation. There are also former conservatives who rejected the party in 2024, and often supporting liberal democrats, because the Rishi Sonak government looked messy, unhappy and simple. These voters may not be lost in front of the conservatives forever, but their fears are exacerbated by the proximity to Mr. Farage.
Conservatives predict deals with reform because it is easier than finding a strategy to rebuild a wide base of support. Kimi Padnosh has comprehensively failed to address this problem. Its analysis of the election result last year is incomplete at best, often not coherent. It does not provide any insight or competition when it comes to the role played by the decrease in public services in the voters’ refusal to rule the conservatives. It appears to be attracted to the battles of cultural war and polarized digital discourse at the expense of developing politics in the real world. Mr. Jenrik, who was beaten by Mrs. Badnosh in the leadership competition last year, who rarely hides his ambition to replace it, has nothing new or more, saying about his party’s dilemma.
A lot of discussion on electoral agreements is truly a transformation from the broader question about whether the UK voting system is able to convert public preferences into a fair parliamentary representation. Evidence does not indicate. The contrast between the majority of the huge public in the Labor Party and the humble national voting session attests to the basic fluctuations and continuous decay of traditional affiliations that made the British party’s policy one day liked.
Mr. Jenrick is not the first politician to understand what this means in terms of parties designated for the third in a position to form a government. This is an insight into some kind, but it is better to eliminate conservative energies in understanding the reasons that make their time in the position led to a collapse of severe support to the point that they are now struggling until they are the main party of the opposition.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you want to provide a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered to be published in our messages section, please click here.