Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Snap elections globally = sign of global war threat?

55 replies

visionahead · 17/06/2024 09:40

Please don't shoot me down with 'conspiracy theories', hear me out. This year more than any time in history, globally voters will head to the polls with around 65 countries meant to hold national elections. This represents around 49% of the people in the world, including some major economies / countries too.

Sunak called a snap election, yes, inflation had gone down but there had at that point already been signs that although energy prices will decrease short term, they will increase again in autumn.

Macron has recently called a snap election, supposedly because of the shift in France to the right after the EU elections. But he must have seen how badly the snap election decision affected Sunak and the Tories. He still went ahead.

Lots of other countries globally seem to have brought their elections forward to what had been expected late last year.

There have for some time now been lots of war talk from major heads of state and heads of defence in many countries including in Europe (Poland, Sweden, Germany, UK etc etc).

Am I unreasonable to think that some of the rush to get us all (not just in the UK) to an election is due to uncertainties about what lies ahead from a perspective of the Ukraine/Russia (and to an extend, Israel/Palestine) with a broader conflict expected?

If so, and I've never been a Tory voter, I do worry that even though the Tories have had a very bad track record (although to be fair to them an any other government in power during the last few years, have had to manage the worst pandemic for over a century and a war - can't think of other governments having to deal with that volume of challenges).

Imagine a new party coming in - how will that work if they're faced with global conflicts. Presumably, they would spend a good few months just settling in, finding their feet? Have we had examples in the past when incoming governments have had to immediately deal with a situation of war?

OP posts:
Tattletwat · 17/06/2024 10:44

The UK's election isn't a snap one it was expected this year

Churchview · 17/06/2024 10:40

Imagine a new party coming in ............................Presumably, they would spend a good few months just settling in, finding their feet?

Reeves says, if elected, Labour wants to “hit the ground running”.

BBC News
Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves is hosting her "British Infrastructure Council" this morning - some of the biggest British and international investors.
It includes CEOs of Lloyds, M&G, Santander and top execs from the international investors Blackrock, and CDPQ. These companies own some of the countries’ biggest infrastructure investments.
It is intriguing that they are meeting mid-election campaign. A sitting government wouldn’t be able to do this because of purdah (rules that restrict what happens in an election campaign) but no similar Conservative initiative has occurred during the campaign.
While all attendees say they are doing so in an “independent advisory” capacity, it seems quite a statement to sit publicly with the shadow chancellor a fortnight before the general election.
Reeves says, if elected, Labour wants to “hit the ground running”.
Private investment is especially important at a time when most parties are saying the public finances are constrained.

x2boys · 17/06/2024 10:40

I wouldn't call it a snap election, it had to be done before Xmas anyway ,I personally thought they would hold it around September/ October ,but it was no great surprise.

fliptopbin · 17/06/2024 10:38

Ok, yes Sunak called a snap election, but we all knew it was going to be sone time this year, so it is hardly a surprise.

Churchview · 17/06/2024 10:28

A new ruling party don't govern in isolation, they are surrounded by thousands of experts, advisors and professionals. It's not like they arrive to an empty office with a new pencil case and a flask.

Winston Churchill hadn't been a PM before 1940 and he seemed to pick things up ok.