Saw complaints from Roderic O'Gorman about SF and SD backing the government's infrastructure bill, saying it undermines climate law.
Any truth to this? What are people's thoughts?
It seems to be accepted fact that SF won't be able to form a government without partnering with FF or FG. I'm curious as to why that is, based on the continuing trend of reduced support for FF/FG over the last five elections.
Obviously the half-life on FF/FG transfers and strong vote management means that FF/FG often punch above their weight in converting votes into seats. I get that. But I'm wondering why the assumption is that in 2029 the field will be sufficiently similar that no other arithmetic is possible.
2007: 68.9% (41.6 FF + 27.3 FG)
2011: 53.5% (36.1 FG + 17.4 FF)
2016: 49.8% (25.5 FG + 24.3 FF)
2020: 43.1% (22.2 FF + 20.9 FG)
2024: 42.7% (21.9 FF + 20.8 FG)
The FF/FG constituency has shrunk by 26% over 17 years. They may rally. But why do we assume they won't shrink further, and open up more space for the opposition (not just SF)?