Tuesday 20 March 2012 12.53pm
Ironically the most likely effect of this sort of candidate standing would be to guarantee Simon's re-election. If you are against the coalition's NHS reforms, you're unlikely to be voting for him anyway. This way, though, votes against him are split more ways. Double irony, he'd then potentially be saved because the electoral system he wanted was rejected...
I suppose if Labour decided not to run a candidate and endorse the 'NHS independent' then maybe - but with such a high chance of winning next time, why not? In reality while the NHS will still be an issue by the election, single-issue candidates tend to do badly in UK elections.
Assuming you are correct ( which I think a considerable assumption) and there is a splintering of the vote where is the evidence to suggest that the Lib Dems are more likely to benefit than eg. Labour.
I have always supported and voted for the Lib Dems .. but am diametrically opposed to the NHS reforms... not because I dislike reform per se.. but because I think these proposals are ill conceived, badly thought through and have been hopelessly badly consulted on.
The strap line of 'single issue candidates tend to do badly in uk elections' in reality is of course a direct challenge to the democratic credentials of supporters of the main parties. I for one would hope our leading politicians would welcome the challenge.