How Labour Beat the Conservatives in Britain after 14 Years, by the Numbers

 05 July 2024, United Kingdom, London: Newly elected UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer gives a speech at his official London residence at No 10 Downing Street for the first time after the Labour party won a landslide victory at the 2024 General Election. (Lucy North/PA Wire/dpa)
05 July 2024, United Kingdom, London: Newly elected UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer gives a speech at his official London residence at No 10 Downing Street for the first time after the Labour party won a landslide victory at the 2024 General Election. (Lucy North/PA Wire/dpa)
TT

How Labour Beat the Conservatives in Britain after 14 Years, by the Numbers

 05 July 2024, United Kingdom, London: Newly elected UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer gives a speech at his official London residence at No 10 Downing Street for the first time after the Labour party won a landslide victory at the 2024 General Election. (Lucy North/PA Wire/dpa)
05 July 2024, United Kingdom, London: Newly elected UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer gives a speech at his official London residence at No 10 Downing Street for the first time after the Labour party won a landslide victory at the 2024 General Election. (Lucy North/PA Wire/dpa)

Great Britain's Labour Party has defeated the Conservatives in a historic parliamentary election for control of the nation's government. With most votes counted, here's a breakdown of the numbers:

412 seats Labour has won 412 seats — a 63% majority — of the 650 seats in the lower house of Parliament. One seat remains undeclared.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives have 121 seats, the smallest number in the party’s two-century history, and down from 365 seats in 2019.

Smaller parties picked up millions of votes, including the centrist Liberal Democrats, who captured 71 seats — up by 60 from the last election. And one of the biggest losers was the Scottish National Party, which held most of Scotland’s 57 seats before the election but looked set to lose all but a handful, mostly to Labour.

Each seat represents a geographic area of the UK. The leader of the party with enough seats to command a majority — either alone or in coalition — becomes prime minister and leads the government.

14 years of power Labour's landslide brought a new party to power for the first time in 14 years.

Parliament had been led by the center-right Conservatives since 2010. They had faced one challenge after another, including Brexit, the COVID-19 pandemic and soaring inflation.

Many voters blamed the Conservatives for the litany of problems facing Britain, from unreliable train service to the cost-of-living crisis and the influx of migrants crossing the English Channel.

In 2010, the Labour Party had been ousted after being in power for 13 years, its longest ever stretch.

By the end of its last reign, Labour’s popularity had taken a dive. That was partly because of the deep recession in the UK that was wrought by the global financial crisis in 2008.

60% support for the two major political parties Labour and Conservative candidates were barely able to muster 60% of votes cast in this election, marking a new low.

For the past 100 years, Britain’s two main political parties have garnered the vast majority of votes. In 1951, for example, the Conservatives and Labour netted nearly 97% of the vote combined. In the decades since, the trend has been clear — down.

The two main political parties had candidates running for more than 600 of the 650 seats in Parliament, according to the House of Commons Library. But so did three other parties: Liberal Democrat, Green and Reform.

An average of seven candidates — from almost 100 different political parties — ran for each seat, the library noted. Nine parties fielded over 50 candidates.

The total number of people running for a seat in Parliament was 4,515 this year, the library stated. That's over a thousand more than in 2019.

Despite that relatively low share of the vote, Prime Minister Keir Starmer will be able to govern with a massive majority in the House of Commons.

In Britain, the candidate with the most votes in each constituency wins even if they don’t get a majority. This makes it easier for a party to win a seat on a relatively low share of the vote, especially when votes are spread out among many parties.



After Pressing an Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire, the Biden Administration Shifts Its Message

 An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)
An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)
TT

After Pressing an Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire, the Biden Administration Shifts Its Message

 An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)
An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)

The Biden administration says there is a significant difference between Israeli actions that have expanded its war against the Iranian-backed armed groups Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran’s retaliatory missile attack against Israel, which it condemned as escalatory.

In carefully calibrated remarks, officials across the administration are defending the surge in attacks by Israel against Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon, while still pressing for peace and vowing retribution after Iran fired about 200 ballistic missiles at Israel on Tuesday.

President Joe Biden praised the US and Israel militaries for defeating the barrage and warned, “Make no mistake, the United States is fully, fully supportive of Israel.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken called the Iranian missile attack “totally unacceptable, and the entire world should condemn it.”

There was little criticism that Israel may have provoked Iran's assault. "Obviously, this is a significant escalation by Iran,” national security adviser Jake Sullivan said.

Just a week after calling urgently for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah to avoid the possibility of all-out war in the Middle East, the administration has shifted its message as Israel presses ahead with ground incursions in Lebanon following a massive airstrike Friday in Beirut that killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Gen. Abbas Nilforushan.

US officials stress that they have repeatedly come out in support of Israel’s right to defend itself and that any change in their language only reflects evolving conditions on the ground. And, officials say the administration’s goal — a ceasefire — has remained constant.

The US has been quick to praise and defend Israel for a series of recent strikes killing Hezbollah leaders. In contrast to its repeated criticism of Israel's war in Gaza that has killed civilians, the US has taken a different tack on strikes that targeted Nasrallah and others but also may have killed innocent people.

At the Pentagon, Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder made it clear that while the US is still “laser focused” on preventing a wider conflict in the Middle East, he carved out broad leeway for Israel to keep going after Hezbollah to protect itself.

“We understand and support Israel’s right to defend itself against Hezbollah,” Ryder said. “We understand that part of that is dismantling some of the attack infrastructure that Hezbollah has built along the border.”

He said the US is going to consult with Israel as it conducts limited operations against Hezbollah positions along the border “that can be used to threaten Israeli citizens.” The goal, he said, is to allow citizens on both sides of the border to return to their homes.

Part of the ongoing discussions that the US will have with Israel, Ryder said, will focus on making sure there’s an understanding about potential “mission creep” that could lead to tensions to escalate even further.

State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said Tuesday that Israel’s targeting of senior Hamas and Hezbollah leaders as well as its initiation of ground incursions into Lebanon are justified because they were done in self-defense.

“If you look at the actions that they have taken, they were bringing terrorists to justice, terrorists who have launched attacks on Israeli civilians,” Miller said.

By contrast, he said that Iran’s response was dangerous and escalatory because it was done in support of Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which are US-designated terrorist organizations that Iran funds and supports.

“What you saw (was) Iran launching a state-on-state attack to protect and defend the terrorist groups that it built, nurtured and controlled,” Miller said. “So there is a difference between the actions.”

The full-throated defense of Israel, however, may come with risks. So far, there is little evidence that the Biden administration's push for a ceasefire and warnings of broadening the conflict have had much impact on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In commentary Monday, Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that US influence on Netanyahu seems to be waning and that he “seems to have blown by US cautions about starting a regional war.”

The White House must “worry that a sustained inability to make diplomatic progress weakens US influence in the Middle East and around the world,” Alterman said, adding that “Netanyahu’s assurance that the United States will stand by Israel in any circumstance emboldens Israel to take more risks than it otherwise would.”