Well, if ever a 0-0 draw felt like a defeat - it's amazing to think that the Conservatives are on course for the highest vote share recorded since 1983 and a surely (without checking) unprecedented vote total, and yet Labour have defied the odds to enforce a hung parliament in what is seen as a real return (in England at least) to 2-party politics. The recriminations will emerge over the coming hours, days and weeks, with Theresa May possibly about to pay the price for what will be looked back on as a nonsensical decision to call the election and an equally nonsensical campaign. Conservative supporters will be raising a glass to Ruth Davidson, whose superb leadership of the party north of the border has saved a lot of blushes and wiped the smile off Wee Jimmy Krankie's face.
So what went wrong for the Conservatives, and/or what went right for Labour? It seemed the major turning point was that May and her party were put on the back foot by certain elements of their manifesto. Opposition to the so-called "Dementia Tax" gained traction for sure, forcing the rather humiliating (and certainly not "strong and stable") U-turn. The weaponisation by Labour of the Manchester and London terror attacks to point to a reduction in police numbers as being a cause also played well to the headlines and put May, the Home Secretary in charge of police numbers until last year, in a very awkward position.
There seemed also to be little coherence in the argument put forward by the Conservatives not just for holding this election but in convincing people to vote for them. While there was some "Project Fear" in 2015, at least the Cameron team mixed this with a positive message about what the party had done in government to steer the UK through tricky waters and emerge the other side. There was no such positivity with the May campaign, choosing instead (when not having to defend bits of the manifesto) to focus entirely on "Project Fear" - learning none of the lessons of the disastrous 2016 Remain campaign. Where was the positive message? There were some very sound policies in the manifesto around education, for example, but at no point were these articulated. Why?
Jeremy Corbyn is, and remains, a hugely divisive figure. There is amongst his supporters a slavish devotion which makes him and his closest confidantes immune to criticism. The decision therefore to focus on his rather unpalatable past instead of tackling policy would be looked on in hindsight as a poor decision. For every headline in the press about his IRA/Hamas-loving past there was an even more steely determination that this simply does not matter any more. Beyond being apparently made of Teflon this smear campaign merely made people resolve to vote for him. Much as, last year, every smug and pompous headline telling people that a vote to leave the EU was borne out of something like racism added a percentage point to the Leave vote.
For his part, Corbyn fought a far more positive campaign than May. There were shambolic elements clearly, but who wouldn't be intoxicated by the sight of huge cheering crowds wherever he went? The manifesto, ignoring the great "fully costed" myth, contained a number of popular ideas that resonated particularly with the younger generation. It read more like a wish list than a set of achievable aims, but hey, it worked. See results in student-heavy seats like Canterbury. He fought like a slugger coming back off the ropes and, while he didn't deliver a knock out blow and in the end narrowly lost on points, he gained the respect of the hostile crowd and earned himself a shot at a re-match.
It's not the end of the world for the Conservatives, but it may feel like it for a time. A minority government, at a time of great uncertainty for the country, is far from ideal, and one suspects there will be another election (oh no, I hear you say!) even as soon as October. Labour, galvanised by events of the past few weeks, will say "bring it on". The Conservatives, on the other hand, need a new approach to campaigning, to put a positive message across while scrutinising and holding closely to account Labour's plans. Dare I say it, a new leader will almost certainly be needed to wipe the slate clean.
