Why a long dreary General Election campaign may be a blessing for SNP

Some may even criticise fellow politicians who engage in predictions, accusing them of planting seeds in voters’ minds to scare them into voting tactically.

So, when I watched Humza Yousaf on Laura Kuenssberg’s BBC show last weekend, I thought: “Now that is something different.”

The First Minister claimed to know the outcome of the upcoming UK General Election, asserting that it is “inevitable” that Labour leader Keir Starmer (below) will become the next prime minister. Essentially, Yousaf’s message to voters is: “Don’t worry about removing the Tories; that’s a done deal.”

He seeks to reassure them that they can have it all – putting an end to the Conservative government while keeping the debate on independence firmly on the table by sending SNP MPs to Westminster.

Personally, I appreciated Yousaf’s straightforward approach. I prefer a politician who reads the room – and the polling figures – speaking candidly, over those who manipulate language. Unless a major catastrophe occurs, Starmer is on track to become the next British prime minister. What the First Minister is really saying is: let’s accept this fact and explore how it can be advantageous for Scotland.

In my experience as a French voter, I find it exasperating when politicians can’t just say it plainly. In the 2017 French presidential election, where Emmanuel Macron faced off against Marine Le Pen, left-winger Jean-Luc Mélenchon (who secured fourth place, with 20% of the vote) struggled to explicitly state that he would support Macron to ensure Le Pen’s defeat.

Instead, he vaguely mentioned going to the polling station, insisting it didn’t require psychic abilities to know his choice. Yet to me, it amounted to the same thing: voting for Macron to thwart Le Pen, much like everyone else. Why is it so challenging to be straightforward?

As voters, we encounter these challenging decisions frequently. Many times, we hold our noses and vote for someone whose vision doesn’t align with ours, simply because it represents an improvement over the current situation, or is the least undesirable option on offer.

However, most of the time there is little satisfaction in such decisions. The person you voted for, not as an expression of support but as a form of protest, ends up governing as if every vote received was an endorsement.

It leaves you with regrets for lending your vote to someone who appears notably indifferent. Talk to any French citizen from the left who voted for Macron in the second round of the past couple of presidential elections, and you will understand the frustration I am expressing.

I feel that nowadays, voting often revolves around keeping something unpalatable at bay. This appears to be the dilemma facing UK voters in the next General Election: whether to oust the Conservatives from 10 Downing Street after 14 years in power or endure their rule for another five years.

READ MORE: Scottish poverty rates below UK average – as Westminster 'shirks responsibility'

The first past the post system essentially forces voters into this binary way of thinking, and frankly it is disheartening. This lack of a genuine choice is killing all enthusiasm in politics. We can see it with the current campaign, which already feels tragically long and dreary.

At this point, it seems irrelevant what Labour do or don’t stand for; because these elections feel like a referendum on the Tories.

The forthcoming General Election is a challenge for the SNP and Yousaf, for sure.

On the one hand, it is almost as if Yousaf (below) implicitly agrees with the view that this election is really about removing the Tories.

He explicitly called for a Tory-free Scotland at the General Election campaign launch earlier this month, stating: “The first step we take towards a brighter future must be to kick the Tories out.”

Simultaneously, he grapples with the need to retain Yes voters who cast their ballots for the SNP and persuade them not to lend their support to Labour, a party against which he doesn’t seem to harbour an extreme aversion, as evidenced by his willingness to engage in talks with Starmer.

I appreciate it when politicians can acknowledge that a situation, while not ideal or something they are enthusiastic about, represents an improvement compared to the present. It is a realistic stance, recognising that things may not be perfect but a first step towards something more manageable. In this context, a Labour government might be seen this way by the SNP.

So what does that mean for the SNP’s performance in the General Election? Predictions are now something I tend to shy away from. Predicting the outcome of an election up to a year in advance takes a lot of bravery.

I bet it isn’t fun being a voter right now, as SNP voters are among the most sought after in Scotland right now. So, pushing the narrative that a Westminster victory is assured for the Labour Party may help to ease the dilemma faced by those voters in the upcoming elections.

Yousaf says that Scottish voters need not vote for the Labour Party to trigger a change in the UK government. According to him, Starmer is on track to become the next prime minister, regardless of Scotland’s vote.

According to polling expert Sir John Curtice, as it stands, the First Minister is technically correct. Current numbers suggest that Labour doesn’t necessarily have to secure numerous seats in Scotland to regain power.

Curtice notes that, with their substantial lead nationwide, the Labour Party is in a strong position, and the Scottish seats may not be extremely decisive in swinging the election.

READ MORE: 'Fake news': BBC panned over claim about Scottish votes in General Elections

However, this narrative is something Labour might want to be cautious about. Achieving a majority, even a slim one, requires a substantial national swing of 12.7%. This figure surpasses the swings achieved by notable Labour figures such as Tony Blair in 1997 and Clement Attlee in 1945.

Considering the uncertainty inherent in politics, a lot can happen in the months leading up to a General Election. The prolonged campaign, lacking a set election date yet, poses a potential risk. What initially seemed like a default vote for Labour may dwindle as people start asking more probing questions about what the party is actually proposing.

There is a growing demand for significant change, which, it is fair to say, Labour seems to be very cautious about. While voters express dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, there is still some hesitation to fully embrace Starmer, as indicated by a lacklustre endorsement in focus groups.

Despite voter fatigue, the extended campaign could be a blessing for the SNP. A significant portion of the public remains undecided. They are the ones who need to be convinced.