Round One: Santos vs. Mockus

It will be no surprise when tonight election authorities deem Juan Manuel Santos of Party of the U and Antanas Mockus of the Green Party have each taken enough votes to propel them to the runoff election on June 20. Neither will have gained a majority, as no one expects them to do so.

What will be surprising I think is the inaccuracy of polling considering Santos' resurgence in the polls since mid-May. Current polls suggest he will net 34% of the vote, though I think this underestimates the percentage by about three to ten percent. Mockus, meanwhile, polls at 32%, and this might also be a bit of a deflated percentage, especially considering the tactical voting that undoubtedly will take place, what with a field of six candidates, with only two of them polling in double-digit territory. I expect Mockus to gain somewhere between two and nine percent more than his poll numbers state.

The losers are the ones we've been expecting would lose since Mockus' stellar rise in early April. These include those from the new smaller parties, like Petro of the Alternative Democratic Pole, and Vargas of Radical Change. The traditionally dominant parties of Colombia, the Liberals and the Conservatives, will have candidates who likewise are unable to break beyond single digit percentages.

Colombia Reports states that election officials to announce the results of the vote on Sunday night.

My final predictions:
Santos 43%
Mockus 39%
Petro 6%
Sanin 5%
Vargas 4%
Pardo 3%

As Arkansas, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania go, so goes the nation?

We've had two days to mull over the results of the primaries in AR, KY, and PA. In Arkansas, Democratic incumbent Blanche Lincoln has nearly been beaten by lieutenant governor Halter, and now must face him in a runoff round on June 8. In Kentucky, Rand Paul, the son of libertarian Congressman Ron Paul of Texas and self-proclaimed Tea Party member, trampled establishment candidate Grayson for the Republican Senate ticket. Finally, longtime Republican-turned-Democrat (in 2009) Arlen Specter was defeated by former Navy Admiral Sestak.

We all know of the anti-incumbency movement that's been rife since the "meltdown" of September 2008 and the following bailouts.

It's coming to fruition now. And in classic American style the process has become a botched half-measure.

Let's be open about this. The Tea Party movement, whether you love it or hate it or have no opinion whatsoever, is a legitimate, and, for U.S. standards, a well-organized protest movement, in that it seems to have widespread grassroots support as well as momentum. Those who identify with the movement normally also identify as Republicans (though disgruntled they are), and certainly have a role in Paul's victory, or rather Grayson's defeat, in Kentucky.



What can we make of the coup d'etat Democratic primaries, however? Tea Partiers may have played a role in Halter's challenger campaign in Arkansas' open primary as tactical voters who want a leftist candidate who can be defeated more easily by their Republican candidate, though I think this is greatly overestimating their numbers and organizational strength. Pennsylvania has closed primaries, so it was Democrats who decided en masse that Specter's move into the Democratic camp last year wasn't sincere enough.

The anti-incumbency mood affects both parties, in this case, though the protesters have chosen, in a sense, to temporarily hijack the Democratic and Republican parties to let their angst be known. And then in the next election cycle in 2012, they will have forgotten all about what made them angry two years before. Or, if they they turn out to have some kind of staying power, maybe they'll get a favorite son candidate nominated for president in the next presidential election. Then what? It's back to business as usual.

If the parties don't feel compelled to change their ideas and actions in order to get your vote or my vote, then they simply will not change for the long term.

If only the protesters would decide the best way to shake up the false dilemma system we currently have by forming a viable third party. It seems ridiculous, though, doesn't it, suggesting the possibility of having just one more plan from which to hole-punch your ballot in the voting booth.

And that's a huge problem. Viable third parties which are able to express differing and nuanced opinions exist in almost every other single democracy on this planet. They don't work here because both major parties in the United States are corporate dependents, and with a first-past-the-post presidential electoral system, the odds are stacked entirely against other parties from entering the fray and being able to compete on even a highly unfair playing field.

The first step must be thorough, fundamental, systemic reform. It will take more than an economic recession, bailouts, and health care laws to shock the American electorate, notorious in their apathy, into positive action.

A few new faces in Washington playing for the same two teams won't change the way the ballgame is played.

The Coalition Begins

I have to admit it--I'm flat-out impressed at the degree of cohesion present in this true coalition between the Conservatives and junior partner Liberal Democrats.

The press conference today was a double act between Prime Minister Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg and was simultaneously a novelty, an oddity, and even a little inspiring. Cameron outlined "freedom, fairness, and responsibility" as being the areas of common agreement, with "one key purpose: strong, stable, determined leadership for the longterm." Pretty vague, but okay. He went on to say that the coalition is going to be one based in reform on an fiscal level, a "green" level, and a social liberal level.

I'm excited about what the Liberal Democrats can possibly get accomplished in government, their first stint since Churchill's wartime coalition. Cameron stated that Clegg's job as Deputy is "political reform." They're outlining that to mean, thanks to an email I received today from the Lib Dem website, fixed-term, five-year parliaments, a referendum on electoral reform, a proportionally-elected House of Lords, the power of recall of MPs, and further local devolution.

Still, it's an interesting beast we have here. The Coalition is a brave new experiment, making two parties that have their origins in opposing groups since the 17th century Tories and Whigs political bedfellows for the next FIVE YEARS. This is a radical sort of commitment, especially, in my mind, from the Conservatives, who could seriously attain a majority of seats in a snap next election in the following months.

If necessity is in fact the mother of invention, the Tories went ahead with this plan out of either a deep sense of duty, beyond party lines, to the country, or out of a deep sense of fear at being the culprits in the next election for not being able to accomplish any of their set goals due to commanding only a neutered minority administration. Whichever reason held more sway, I think Cameron himself was the deciding factor. Credit must be given where credit is due, and it is certainly due to Cameron, whom I am liking better with each passing day.

Nick Clegg began by saying this concerning his recent political marriage to Cameron: "Until today, we were rivals, and now we're colleagues."

Surreal, indeed.

Just don't be surprised when the two start being referred to collectively and derisively as Davick Cleggeron, leader of the Liberative Democratories. It'll happen.

See the half-hour press conference here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FCOvu2NDio

A beautiful day in the political world

The electioneering and the political wheeling and dealing are over for now. Brown has resigned and Cameron is the new Prime Minister. The Conservatives have, to my joy, decided on going with a full-on coalition with the Liberal Democrats, with Clegg as Deputy PM and four other Lib Dems promised cabinet seats.



This is the best possible scenario for now. The Tories need to be in now, obviously, as they have the most votes and the most seats. This is owed to them. Many policy areas the two parties already agree on, such as reform in education, cutting government budget and reducing the deficit, fixed-term parliaments, and even a referendum on the alternative vote. Plus, the numbers to get to a majority only added up between the Tories and Lib Dems. A "left" alliance could never have attained a stable majority, and would be decimated in the next election, when the Tories could have rightfully claimed that their right to power had been squandered. As it stands now, both the Cons and the Libs have a lot to gain from this power-sharing agreement.



Gordon Brown was never a terrible man. He had many good ideas and knew the political process as a pro should, but was simply never a good leader. I hope he finds something out there that he is more capable of doing at this point. There's always a tinge of sadness present when leaders surrender power to the next person.

A job well done to David Cameron. I hope he turns out to be as great and fair a leader as the Conservatives already believe him to be.

On an unrelated note save for it also happened today, on the bus ride home from school, traffic was held at a stop light by police so that an escorted motorcade could have the right of way after leaving an army base nearby. The bus driver knew Uribe was in this city today, and so told me when I asked him what was happening. As the cars began to pass, I caught in a fraction of a second the sight of President Uribe sitting in the passenger seat of an SUV, his window rolled down.

Later, we were told that Antanas Mockus was having a campaign rally in the center of town at five o'clock. We got there early and waited for two hours in our Partido Verde t-shirts until finally he came and spoke and made me appreciate him all over again. My favorite line from tonight: "The next chapter of Colombia's history will be written with a pencil, not with blood."


Melody and I are standing somewhere near the front of the audience in this picture!

Brown gives his two weeks notice

PM Gordon Brown announced today he will stand down as Labour leader before the party conference in September. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/election_2010/8672859.stm

Why this? Why now?

The simplest answer is his party doesn't like him, he lost the election for Labour, he was never properly elected as leader to replace Blair in the first place back in 2007, and he is THE primary stumbling block to negotiations between Labour and the Liberal Democrats to form a coalition.

All these very good reasons play a part. Of primary importance in this very moment, however, is obviously the question of what role Labour will have or not have in the formation of the next government of Britain.

The Lib Dems met with Labour today and in secret yesterday for discussions. It is quite likely Brown resigning as leader was a precondition for a possible pact between those two parties, and also gave Labour itself a pretext by which to force terms on Brown. It is no secret that many believe him to be personally responsible for Labour's poor showing and have wanted to replace him for years.

This is tricky ground. Labour quite clearly lost to the Conservatives in the election last Thursday at 48 seats and 7% vote behind the Tories. All math trying to construct a Lib-Lab pact to continue government seems to be against a center-left agreement. The numbers simply do not add up to a majority without including nationalistic party MPs from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, which would give a progressive alliance just enough numbers for the smallest of majorities, which could then be undermined by concessions to the smaller parties, backbenchers voting how they like, by-elections eating away at the tiny majority, as well as being viewed by the public as a cobbled losers' coalition. And basically, that's exactly what it would be. This alliance would barely survive a year at best due to high instability. And when the voters finally had their say in the next election to be held quite soon, everyone besides the Conservatives could count on severe backlash resulting in vote share and seat reduction. That's a high price to pay only for the notion of a referendum on proportional voting.

If I had advice that the Lib Dems would heed right now, I'd impress upon them the sheer necessity to reach an agreement with the Conservatives. The Tories have the largest vote and seat share, a pact with them would be only between these two parties, they would have a majority of some thirty seats, and would be seen, jointly, as putting manifesto interests aside in the interest of the country at large. Even if the alliance were short-lived, I think both parties would get a great amount of positive publicity, and would possibly be rewarded in the next election coming within 18 months with higher vote percentages and more seats. It is in the Lib Dems' interest moreso to gain public confidence than to gain a referendum on proportional voting.

Party leaders are calling tomorrow "crunch time." Hopefully that means Nick Clegg and his Liberals have accepted an offer to form the next government with the Conservatives under the new Prime Minister, David Cameron.

The end of Harry Potter?

No, I'm not talking about the movie franchise soon to be complete, but about Mr. Jan Peter Balkenende of the Netherlands, who has served as Prime Minister from July 22, 2002 and whose service may soon be coming to an end. He also happens to resemble the titular character of the fantasy series, as noted by some such as the Belgian Minister for Foreign Affairs back in 2005.

Balkenende has led four different cabinets in his eight year tenure and has secured the most seats for his Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) in four consecutive elections. Balkenende I came about when the electorate turned sharply away from Wim Kok's "purple coalition" of the social democratic Dutch Labour Party (PvdA), the conservative liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and the progressive liberal Democrats 66 (D66). Many attributed this swing to Pim Fortuyn nationalistic views on foreign (read Muslim) influences in the Netherlands and Fortuyn's subsequent death at the hands of an assassin nine days before the election, which in turn brought a huge sympathy vote to the Pim Fortuyn List (LPF). Balkenende's coaltion of CDA-LPF-VVD was highly unstable from the beginning due to severe conflicts both inside and outside the LPF. It fell and new elections were held in January 2003.

The LPF was decimated in the vote, and though Balkenende attempted to form a coalition with the second largest party, PvdA, these discussions went nowhere and he therefore formed a liberal-conservative coalition with the VVD and D66.

When that coalition dissolved, another election was held in November 2006, resulting in center-right VVD and D66 losing a significant amount of their seats. The PvdA and smaller CU allied with the CDA to form Balkenende's fourth cabinet.

In February this year, Labour (PvdA) pulled out of government when no progress could be made on whether or not to keep Dutch troops in Afghanistan. This triggered an election set for Wednesday, June 9, 2010.

There is still one month to go from today's date. Polling shows a large increase in the number of seats since the previous election for Gert Wilders' Party for Freedom (PVV), which has adopted a number of reactionary policies like holding suspects without trial, forced integration of immigrants into Dutch society, and Euroscepticism. The other parties see the PVV as being on the hard right of the spectrum and as being a single issue party.

So far, the conservative liberal VVD seems to be in a neck and neck battle for first place with Labour, at 33 seats each. CDA is at third place with 27 seats. Wilders' PVV is at 17, D66 sits at 11, and Christian Union and Green Left are tied with 10 each.

Based on the advice of my Dutch friend, Kevin, it is my belief that VVD leader Mark Rutte is going to replace Balkenende as Prime Minister after this election. Dutch cabinets tend to composed of three constituent parties that are able to command the confidence of a majority in Parliament. This means that out of 150 seats, a typical Dutch government will have half+1 for a majority: at least 76.

Given these poll results, the seats are quite evenly divided, making a cabinet formation of two larger parties and one smaller party difficult. Should VVD become the main party, instincts and history suggest that they would be in alliance with D66, and possibly CDA to form a center-right coalition. But this only takes the coalition to 71 seats, five short of a majority. As of now, this combination doesn't look likely.

What are some other likelihoods? A purple coalition has worked in the past and could work again. Should VVD and PvdA attain the same number of seats and tie for first place, logic suggests the two would attempt to work with one another. Polls now show that this combination would have 66 seats. Including a smaller party like Green Left or D66 would bring the coalition to 76 and 77 seats, respectively, forming a majority.

With CDA facing the possibility of being ousted, the question now is in what direction would the Netherlands like to go--left, right, or somewhere in between?

An unlikely populist

While the Lib Dems and the Conservatives build day-by-day consensus to see if they can indeed work together on the business of Britain's government, I'm going to focus for a bit on three other elections that are coming between late May and mid June. I'm going to spend the next few days blogging about the Colombian presidential election on May 30, the Dutch general election on June 9, and the Belgian general election set for June 13. Of course, you can count on me updating about the tenuous situation in Great Britain in the meantime.

I teach at a bilingual primary school here in Colombia, so I've had a lot of personal insight on the coming election here.

Colombia's presidential election has gone from a dull coronation procession to a dynamic fight to the finish. Everyone, me included, felt certain that Alvaro Uribe, the two-term small-c conservative who made Colombia safe again by chasing the guerilla movements far into the forests and away from influence in the cities, was on his way to securing a constitutional change allowing him to run for a third term, much as he had done four years ago when he successfully changed the constitution so that he could run for a second term. On February 26, 2010, the Supreme Court of Colombia, in a brave and possibly dangerous decision, struck down the attempt at a third term as unconstitutional. Uribe would not be the next president. The shock hadn't worn off yet when Uribe's former defense minister, Juan Manuel Santos, declared his intention of being Colombia's next president. This is a man who was responsible for sending a strike force over Colombia's border with Ecuador in 2008 to ambush a FARC camp there. He was successful in "Operation Checkmate" but both Ecuador's president and regional loudmouth Hugo Chavez got pretty pissed off. Santos is the man who formed a new political party called the Party of the U to support the president's policies, the "U" supposedly standing for "Unity" but which everyone assumes means "Uribe." Santos is the man who introduced the action of "false positives," which involves a military raid of a farm or peasant village and killing campesinos who they promise were actually communist narcotrafficking guerillas. The centerpiece of Santos' campaign is "Advancement through Security." It gives me the willies.

Enter the Green Party of Colombia. Three former mayors of Bogota, Penalosa, Garzon, and Mockus, formed Partido Verde late last year as a more centrist alternative to the many right wing parties (Party of the U, the Conservative Party, and Radical Change) as well as the corrupt center-left Liberal Party and the largely forgotten leftist Democratic Pole. They called themselves post-uribists. Nobody took them seriously.

On the same day as the congressional elections here that fell on March 14, the Green Party held its presidential primary. Antanas Mockus won it. It wasn't the first time that Mockus had run for president. In 2006 he ran as an independent and got no more than two percent in the first round of voting. Everybody knew Mockus was an eccentric figure. Mockus is a second generation Lithuanian who speaks Spanish and Lithuanian natively and French and English as second languages. He studied in the United States and France. He was a math professor. He had been fired from his post as head of the National University back in 1993 due to an incident in which he mooned a disrespectful group of students in the university theatre when no one and nothing could get them to stop heckling and shouting. He was Bogota's mayor in the nineties and early two-thousands and gained a rapt audience when he paraded about in red and gold tights as Supercitizen, ripping down posters and painting over graffiti in a city beautifying attempt. He hired mimes to humiliate Bogota's notoriously bad drivers who weren't concerned about police presence or fines when it came to driving. He appeared in a commercial taking a shower to promote water conservation. And he's turned Colombia's electorate, jaded by decades of corruption and empty promises, into a group of interested hopefuls again.

People started noticing Mockus when Sergio Fajardo, a popular Medellin mayor and former mathematics professor as well, chose to end his own populist campaign for president to join Mockus as his running mate. Since that point, opinion polling has seen support for Mockus rise every single week following April 5, and within a couple weeks he had surpassed Santos for first round voting. Datexco's May 7 poll shows him at 37.7% compared to 25.2% for Santos. And for the runoff round, to be held, if necessary, on June 20, the poll has Mockus on 52% compared to 30.5% for Santos. Mockus appears to have won this election.

But, if I've learned anything from my predictions concerning the UK election, it's not to overestimate support by simply referencing a poll. Colombia is one of Latin America's longest-lived democracies, but the democracy is still fragile. Buying votes is of coures illegal, but when Mockus campaigns on educating the populace and creating a new culture of legality, it's because he knows that the rule of law in this country is weak. And Santos is already playing ugly with a huge smear campaign attempting to prove the naivite of the "atheist" "ideologue" that Mockus is.

Hopefully, the Lithuanian-Colombian's support is so overwhelming that even with the inclusion of all the illegal votes, Mockus will still come out on top. He would be the world's first Green Party head of state. I feel as though the positive development of this country depends on a succession of selfless politicians who will work tirelessly to improve Colombia's rule of law and the societal wisdom of the common person. And I think Mockus is the man who can start this country on the path to positive growth.

As an American, however, I'm not allowed to vote. But I am allowed to buy his t-shirt!

The first time since February 1974

I watched until I had to go to bed, and it wasn't looking good for the Lib Dems, nor especially for Labour. When I woke up, I found, as everyone did, just what we all thought was going to happen: a hung House of Commons. Vote and seat totals are as follows:

Conservatives, 36.1% with 306 seats for a swing of +97.
Labour, 29% with 258 seats for a swing of -91.
Liberal Democrats, 23% with 57 seats for a swing of -5.
Others parties, 11.9% with 28 seats.

I'm not surprised with the results of the Tories, who had been projected all along to be the biggest party, nor with Labour, whose vote and seat numbers I called with quite close accuracy. But the Liberal Democrats had the biggest disappointment of the night, for a win of only one percent over the last election in 2005 and a net loss of five seats, despite pre-election polls giving them no less than 25%, and in some, above Labour, at 29%. It turns out that, as Nick Clegg said, in the voting booth, people decided to go with "what they know" in times of financial crises. The polling was just dead wrong, with some, myself included, under the impression that they were on their way to a major breakthrough and adding at least 18 seats, with wild aspirations of swinging up to 38 seats from the other two parties.

But as of now, no party has a majority. This means Gordon Brown squats inside Number 10 Downing Street, hoping for his chance, while the Tories and Lib Dems mash out some kind of compromise with one another in return for stable government for the next eighteen or so odd months. Will it work? That's the big question right now.

Nick Clegg stated from the near beginning his intention of approaching the party with the largest mandate in popular vote should they require help in forming a majority. He's playing his cards right so far by going to Tories first. Should the compromise prove successful in the end, he will have behind him, nominally, 59.1% of the voting population. This would theoretically allow for the most stable match-up scenario, as any stray thoughts of a Con-Lab compromise/coalition are pipe dreams due to over one hundred years of anathema between the two parties.

The problem everyone sees here is that the policy that the Lib Dems want the most, that of electoral reform toward proportional representation, will almost certainly not be offered by a Conservative government, the party which prides itself on a history of strong mandates made stronger under a voting system which serves to marginalize every voter who does not vote for the ultimate winner in Westminster. Instead, Cameron is offering a tri-partisan commission on evaluating the pros and cons of such a voting system. This is lip service at best.

A Con-Lib Dem compromise would, however, be much stronger with more longevity than the primary alternative--that of a Lab-Lib Dem compromise/coalition. Together, the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats account for a majority of the electorate at 52%, and they would have together nine more seats than the Tories, though they would still be eleven seats short of a majority. Looking to the smaller parties, the Social Democratic and Labour Party of Northern Ireland seems a natural Labour ally, though three more seats only brings a tripartite coalition/compromise to 318 seats, still eight short. Along down the line, even if they could convince the lone Green MP or the solitary Alliance MP into coalition, this scenario still has them six short. This government probably couldn't even get a referendum passed through the Commons due to opposition from the Conservatives and regional parties like the Unionists from Northern Ireland, the Scottish Nationals, and Plaid Cymru in Wales.

A Labour/Liberal Democrat alliance does, although, make more logical sense than does one between the Tories and Liberals. Both Labour and the Liberal Democrats are left-of-center parties who have similar policies concerning the economic situation. Most commentators see them as more natural allies as far as policy goes. And as far as the Lib Dems' biggest aspiration, that of electoral reform, the Labour Party is tantalizing them with a much-publicized plan to put to the people a referendum on the voting system in Britain. Is this an offer the Lib Dems can refuse?

In a word, yes. The Lib Dems are only a third party, but they've stuck around since 1945 in various incarnations (as the Liberal Party, and later, the Social Democratic Party) due to a keen sense of strategy and pragmatism. These people are not stupid, nor are they blinded by ideology. The Lib Dems will end up choosing the path that makes the most sense for their continued existence, and, as this election has proven, there is a strong alternative with the power to change the direction of the UK only six percent behind Labour. Both the Conservatives and Labour NEED them. For the first time since 1978's Labour minority they're in a position of real power and hold the key to real change in British government.

So, what the hell are they going to do? I can only guess. I think, in the next few days, it will become clear that they are willing to do business, for the time being, with Mr. Cameron and his Conservatives. This is both the popular and pragmatic choice. They will be seen to support the "winning" Tories as opposed to the "losing" Labour Party, which will help as far as popular support goes, and will position them well for the next general election which I predict will come about no later than November 10, 2011. In this new election, the Lib Dems could then tout the fact that they were an integral stabilizing factor in government for months and months and had done so for the good of the British people despite not having their dearest policy, that of electoral reform see the true light of day. A center-left party could work successfully with a center-right party in Great Britain for the first time in 65 or more years.

They would be in a damned good position indeed.

Let's wait til Sunday or Monday to see what eventually pans out. Keep your fingers crossed, please.

Final Predictions for May 6

Based on all the polling floating about cyberspace, my final prediction of tomorrow's outcome in the UK general election is as follows:

Conservatives, 37% and some 280 seats in the Commons.
Labour, 29% and around 265 seats.
Liberal Democrats, 26% and somewhere near 80 seats.

Gordon Brown will halfheartedly attempt to remain in power by asking the Lib Dems to support his government. The Liberals will refuse, due to personal animosity between Clegg and Brown. Brown will resign. The Queen will ask the largest party, the Tories to form a government under David Cameron. Cameron will try to wield power as a minority government with help from the Ulster Unionists and Democratic Unionists, both small-c conservative parties from Northern Ireland. He will ask for limited support from the Lib Dems only whenever absolutely necessary (which might be never). Due to instability, Cameron will ask for another general election within eighteen months' time, which should place it at or before November 10, 2011.

I purposefully went with higher percentages than average for the Tories and Labour due to my feeling that support for the Lib Dems is overstated due to "Shy Labour" and a minimal effect of "Shy Tory." Hopefully I'm wrong and the Lib Dems manage a popular vote just above Labour. That would make bringing Labour around to the notion of proportional representation that much easier.

And so will Gordon Brown's departure to be replaced by one of the Miliband brothers as the new leader. But that's another post for the future.

Voting begins in six hours. Sit tight.

How things are shaping up in Britain

The Lib Dems have secured the support of one of the major left-leaning publications in Britain--The Guardian. This is a departure from the paper's normal preference, the Labour Party. And in its article, it explains that the Lib Dems have a better case for "fairness" in this election than does Labour, primarily based on the electoral reform argument, which would in turn help the Lib Dems by getting representation in Westminster proportional to the popular vote received, while stopping the exaggerated dominance of the top two parties have had for the past almost ninety years.

The Times also switched traditional support to the Conservatives from Labour, the first time in 18 years this has happened. The Economist, my favorite publication on all things political and, of course, economic, also came out in support of Cameron's party. That disappointed me a bit. They said he had the best economic plans of the three. Funny, I always thought his ideas were backward, reactionary, and possibly damaging.

Angus Reid polling has support for the Conservatives at 35%, the Lib Dems at 29%, and Labour at 23%. If these numbers hold even slightly true for the election on Thursday, it will certainly be no surprise to me when Labour has a "deathbed conversion," as The Guardian put it, to electoral reform. The Labour Party hasn't come in anything below 2nd place since before 1922, though they came very close in 1983.

And as Nick Clegg warned, the Conservatives are certainly on the wrong side of the proportional representation debate. It is my strong opinion that when the Conservatives take a plurality in votes and not quite enough seats for a majority government, they will eagerly form a new government and attempt to govern only with support of a smaller party (the Lib Dems or UUP or UKIP) when they have to have the votes to pass a measure. The idea of coalition will be so foreign to them that by tradition they will oppose it, and this opposition will hopefully be their swift downfall.

There are already reports of those who will vote tactically on Thursday. Under proportional representation, this would be a moot point, but the antiquated first-past-the-post system makes tactical voting a very real threat to all parties, with focus being on the big three. There are those so opposed to having a Tory government that they will vote for whichever left-ish party seems to have greater support in marginal seats. Actual Lib Dem supporters going for Labour and vice versa.

This is the worst possible manner of voting. There are no options for listing parties by preference, so apparent party preference is skewed, and it could possibly mean true Lib Dem supporters are propping up an increasingly tired Labour government, led by an increasingly tired PM, and accepting a mediocre or even poor center-left administration solely for the sake of not having the Tories back in. If this were how everyone decided to vote, Britain would be regressing to a system more resembling that of the United States, where two sameish parties vie in each election cycle to be the lesser of two bad choices. Tactical voting results in accepting a false dilemma. There is in reality always a third choice, a fourth choice, a seventy-seventh choice.

I'm going to be researching the upcoming Dutch and Belgian elections in June in the very near future, and will hopefully start blogging about them soon. And then, of course, here in Colombia there is a presidential election that's looking to be the most exciting one since Gaitan in 1948.

A very happy May Day/Labor Day to everyone out in blogspot land. Being an American, this world holiday has never really meant anything to me, as the U.S. has Labor Day in September. It was interesting to go outside today and see that the streets were quite empty--always the first indicator of a Colombian holiday. Just too bad it had to be a Saturday, or we could've had a day off from school during the week.

Also, as a side note, it has been thirteen years to the day since Labour won their historic 1997 victory under the leadership of Tony Blair. May 2 will be thirteen years since he took office as Prime Minister. Gordon Brown now looks to be the last Labour PM for some years to come.