To choose one party leader who makes a catastrophic error of judgement may be regarded, to borrow from Oscar Wilde, as a misfortune; but to choose two in quick succession looks like carelessness.
First David Cameron gambled and lost with the Brexit referendum. Now Theresa May has done the same by calling a wholly unnecessary general election. What is it with these people? Do the words hubris and nemesis mean nothing to them?
Thank you, young voters, who seem to have woken from their Brexit nightmare and flocked to the polling stations. (According to Lord Ashcroft’s post-election survey, two-thirds of voters aged 18-24 voted Labour.)
Thank you, fellow Remainers, who seem to have decided, despite the confused message from party leaders, that Labour was their best chance of softening the terms of the UK’s departure from the EU. (According to Ashcroft, more than half Remain voters went for Labour.)
Thank you, voters in Scotland, who gave the SNP a bloody nose, kicked a second independence referendum out of sight and thereby saved the Union for the foreseeable future. (Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson both defeated? Wow …)
And thank you, voters everywhere, who ignored the pundits (yes, including me), who said Jeremy Corbyn could never be an election winner, and ignored the right-wing tabloids who spewed their usual poison all over the body politic. Last night, it most definitely was neither The Sun nor the Daily Mail what won it.
It is at times like this that I cherish democracy and the determination of voters to make up their own minds, for their own reasons, how to cast their votes.
Back in April, when Mrs May announced the snap election, I recalled the fate of Edward Heath in 1974, when he called an election to answer the question ‘Who governs Britain?’ and received, much to his surprise, the answer ‘Not you, matey.’ Mrs May may think that she can hang on as a busted flush PM (does she really think that her harping on about the need for ‘stability’ convinces anyone at all?), but she must know that her days are numbered.
The election result was an unusually personal defeat for the prime minister: the Tory campaign was built around her, and her alone, to a ridiculous degree. The Tory manifesto offered nothing of note save the unlamented ‘dementia tax’, and the party’s messaging barely included even the party’s name.
Contrary-wise, the result was a personal triumph for Jeremy Corbyn. He stuck to his guns, remained true to himself, and allowed himself to be steered into a commanding position at the head of an impressively effective campaign. (According to Ashcroft, more than half of Labour’s voters made up their minds after the campaign had started. So goodbye to the notion that campaigns make no difference to the outcome.)
But once the Labour cheers have died down (after all, they still didn’t win), and the Tory tears have dried, one huge black cloud remains casting a pall over Westminster. What happens now to Brexit?
Theresa May wanted a strong Brexit mandate. Instead, she has emerged weakened and humiliated. Jeremy Corbyn wanted … well, to this day, I’m still not sure what he wanted. In theory, formal negotiations begin in less than two weeks’ time. Good luck with that, to whoever has to pretend to be representing Britain.
It is not entirely fanciful to see the election result, at least in part, as the Revenge of the Remainers. If all those young voters yesterday had turned out for the referendum, things would be looking very different.
So: before long, a new Conservative party leader. A rethought approach to Brexit. Perhaps even a cross-party negotiating committee? And an entirely new political landscape.
Back to a two-party system. A re-energised youth vote. A much diminished nationalism in both Scotland and the UKIP heartlands of England.
Don’t anyone dare tell me that politics is boring.
And in case you were wondering, yes, I have already applied to join the International Federation of Hat-Eaters, but I’m told there is a huge waiting list. In the circumstances, it's hardly surprising.