Some interesting statistics in the latest Economist:
One clue to how support may flow between the parties was provided by last year's London mayoral elections, where ... people were given two votes. Of those who selected the BNP's candidate as their first choice, 49 per cent cast their second ballot for UKIP and 22 per cent chose the Conservatives. Those who preferred UKIP gave 22 per cent of their second-choice votes to the BNP and 36 per cent to the Tories. Conservative voters did not reciprocate so generously, suggesting they were more focused on stopping the re-election of Labour's candidate, Ken Livingstone, than in protesting. Just 7 per cent cast their second-preference votes for the BNP.
(Original is here for Economist subscribers.)
The article goes on to remind readers that the National Front atrophied and died during the frist decade of Conservative government after 1979. The Tory party has a big enough tent to accommodate bonkers right-wingers while keeping them far removed from the levers of power. Besides, in general elections voters tend to swing from small parties to the three big ones, on the grounds that local and European polls are fair game for a protest but a Westminster ballot should 'make a difference'. So perhaps Michael Howard's anti-immigration campaign will simply split the BNP and UKIP votes without much impact on the balance of power in the new parliament.
Naively optimistic? Well, it's Friday. Cup half-full day.
