The 1931 election took place only two years after the previous election, because of a cabinet deadlock around spending cuts.
The 1951 election was a snap election, called only 20 months after the previous election, because Labour hoped to increase the slim majority they had (it was a hilariously bad move, they lost by a landslide)
I can’t find specific reasons why the 1959 election was in October, so I’ll count that as a mark in the “a normal October election” column. Ditto for 1964, which seems to have been in October because '59 one was, and there were leadership elections within both parties In 1963.
The 1974 election was the second one to be held that year and happened because the previous election resulted in a hung parliament
That being said, digging through the list of UK general elections for this comment made me realise that there’s so much disruption in the history of UK elections that it’s probably not useful for me to have used the word “abnormal”, because what even is normal when disruption seems to be the norm.
Despite this, I’m even more dubious of the choice of when an election will be held because it’s pretty clear that the precedent is that the timing is usually a deliberate and strategic choice - calling an election when you think you’re going to win is just standard practice, it seems. However, I still have beef with an October election if it happens, because in my opinion, that would be disproportionately affecting a particular voting demographic in a way that feels undemocratic beyond what is usual for the (sometimes slimy) tactic of strategic timing
(Edit: though also, I want to be clear, thank you for your comment — I learnt a lot while building my reply, which I appreciate. I hope I do not come across as overly adversarial)
At least 4 out of 6 of those elections happened because of abnormal circumstances.
The 1924 election was because of a vote of no confidence that triggered an early election
The 1931 election took place only two years after the previous election, because of a cabinet deadlock around spending cuts.
The 1951 election was a snap election, called only 20 months after the previous election, because Labour hoped to increase the slim majority they had (it was a hilariously bad move, they lost by a landslide)
I can’t find specific reasons why the 1959 election was in October, so I’ll count that as a mark in the “a normal October election” column. Ditto for 1964, which seems to have been in October because '59 one was, and there were leadership elections within both parties In 1963.
The 1974 election was the second one to be held that year and happened because the previous election resulted in a hung parliament
That being said, digging through the list of UK general elections for this comment made me realise that there’s so much disruption in the history of UK elections that it’s probably not useful for me to have used the word “abnormal”, because what even is normal when disruption seems to be the norm.
Despite this, I’m even more dubious of the choice of when an election will be held because it’s pretty clear that the precedent is that the timing is usually a deliberate and strategic choice - calling an election when you think you’re going to win is just standard practice, it seems. However, I still have beef with an October election if it happens, because in my opinion, that would be disproportionately affecting a particular voting demographic in a way that feels undemocratic beyond what is usual for the (sometimes slimy) tactic of strategic timing
(Edit: though also, I want to be clear, thank you for your comment — I learnt a lot while building my reply, which I appreciate. I hope I do not come across as overly adversarial)