It is already conventional to name the former party leaders Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage as the biggest losers of the British general election. But this is to understate the abject defeat suffered by some Keynesian economists, and in particular the Nobel prize winning former Princeton professor Paul Krugman.
American observers of UK politics would do well to see the U.S. parallels here. The dilemma facing the UK Labour Party is basically the one faced by Democratic presidential candidates as they seek victory in 2016. If either major UK political party fails to find its way, the US stands poised to lose its most reliable European ally.
This week saw the first conservative government reelected to a second term in the U.K. since Margaret Thatcher's. Returns showed David Cameron winning easily, with Labour and the Liberal Democrats losing big. But the other clear losers were the pollsters, along with anyone who believed their predictions of a virtual tie. Pollsters are not exactly on a roll. In March, polls wrongly showed a dead-heat in Israel between the Zionist Union party and Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud, which, in fact, won handily. And here at home, polls in the 2014 midterms overestimated Democrats in Senate races by four percent. As three new candidates -- Mike Huckabee, Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson -- tossed their hats into the crowded presidential ring this week, it's a good time to remind ourselves about the folly of breathless poll-obsessed political coverage. It's the people, not the polls, that matter. And focusing on the horse race at the expense of debating real issues makes losers of us all.
As the world pauses with Tom Brady to "digest" the NFL report, take our latest Week to Week news quiz and find out what else happened this week.
Britain is f*cked. Gone are the days when power was exchanged between the main political behemoths -- Labour and the Conservatives.
For too long American politicians have gotten off easy, not just from the press but from the voters as well. Because of our acquiescence, we have let the lunatics take over the asylum. The British model demonstrates that things don't have to be that way.
Congratulations to you, Nate Silver. To date you have many fans. But remember that you are one election away from being a mere mortal like the rest of us.
Brits didn't exactly flock to the polls in record numbers for last Thursday's election, but after the results left us in limbo for five days we've been refreshing Twitter and news feeds like it's going out of style.
Elections are supposed to be an opportunity for the people to express the direction in which they want the country to travel. By that standard, this result is an insult.
Well they've done it now. A right coalition of the Posh it is, Eton, Oxbridge and all that: Tory-Liberal, where the metro sexual elite meet.
You thought that George W. Bush was an ultra-rich kid with a sense of entitlement to rule and a mission to take care of fellow millionaires? Meet Britain's new Prime Minister!
It was a display of local democracy in action. No machines, no computers. Those dozens of ballot counting ladies (and gentlemen) were the unsung heroes of this otherwise muddled election.
Looking across the Atlantic these last few days, I've been watching the unfolding political situation in my country with great interest.
A weak, indecisive coalition government in London portends just when a strong, stable government is needed to confront Britain's and Europe's mounting financial crises.
In a country that many Americans associate with endless NHS waiting lines, and sluggish bureaucracy, local election campaigns are well-oiled machines in the UK.