Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
Posts: 12,298
|
 |
« on: August 19, 2015, 03:06:15 PM » |
|
Let's go through Lichtman/DeCell's keys.
Party Mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S.
House of Representatives than after the previous midterm elections.
Doesn't really apply to the UK, though local elections, by-elections and European elections may or may not be indicators.
Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination.
Doesn't apply unless you count the Prime Minister being challenged for the leadership during a parliament.
Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president.
Doesn't apply, though it could do next time if Cameron decides to stay on as PM during the campaign and let a new leader fight it.
Third party: There is no significant third party or independent campaign.
Third parties have been a factor for decades.
Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign.
This could work.
Long term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms.
As could this.
Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy.
Definitely this.
Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term.
This too.
Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal.
Yes.
Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs.
Ditto.
Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs.
Yep.
Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero.
Well yeah, but no PM since Churchill has really been a 'national hero' and only two or three have been charismatic as such.
Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero.
Again, few charismatic LOTOs.
|
