Talk:Snap election

United States and United Kingdom

Why does the United States, which does not have snap elections (or the concept of dissolving the legislature, for that matter) have treatment in this article, but not the mother of the Westminster system, the United Kingdom? -Rrius (talk) 22:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Israel

The examples from the Knesset seem to have occurred because of breakdowns in governing coalitions -- which isn't usually considered a 'snap election' -- because an election is required (or at least expected) when a parliamentary governmnet loses confidence of the parliament -- but I'm not that familiar with Israeli politics, so not sure if they should remain in the article. DanTrent (talk) 22:37, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like the situation in Denmark. There are many different variants in laws and practises in different countries, and the definitions given in the article do not consider all possibilities. I cannot say how to fix this, but something is amiss.--Nø (talk) 10:00, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Sweden?

According to our lead, the winners of a snap election will sit a full term, not just what is left of a the term. But according to the section on Sweden, this is not the case here. However, the Swedish 2015 elections do not meet the definitions of "special elections" or "recall elections" either. Something needs to be fixed here, but not being an expert I cannot say how.--Nø (talk) 09:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Snap election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080604152951/http://www.asiasociety.org:80/publications/indian_elections.13.a.html to http://www.asiasociety.org/publications/indian_elections.13.a.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050909081306/http://www.cnn.com:80/WORLD/9611/05/pakistan/index.html to http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9611/05/pakistan/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Early Election

Should an Early Election page be created to redirect to this article? 2606:6000:6787:CF00:35E7:C696:FCC6:E887 (talk) 20:31, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Snap election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130929162752/http://www.radio.cz/en/section/news/news-2013-08-28 to http://www.radio.cz/en/section/news/news-2013-08-28#1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:56, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Early elections versus snap elections

There appears to be a significant difference between early elections and snap elections. Some countries tend to have (what I would call) snap elections which are called or requested by the incumbent in order to achieve political goals, e.g., an increased majority or an all-but-certain victory now rather than an uncertain outcome in a few years, ensuring a longer overall stay in power. In other countries, there is more of a concept of early elections, which are called because the incumbent has no other choice, having lost the confidence of the majority. For instance, when a coalition breaks down.

In such countries, the idea of calling an election simply because it suits the incumbent is practically unheard of. For instance, in Germany, the parliament formally does not even have the right to dissolve prematurely, and (rare) snap elections have led to court cases.

In my view, this article conflates these two, and there should be a separate article on early elections (or a separate section within this article). KarlFrei (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Snap election. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20130820161354/http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/lawmakers-dissolve-parliaments-lower-house-czech-republic-to-hold-early-election/2013/08/20/adc1cb46-09ae-11e3-89fe-abb4a5067014_story.html to http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/lawmakers-dissolve-parliaments-lower-house-czech-republic-to-hold-early-election/2013/08/20/adc1cb46-09ae-11e3-89fe-abb4a5067014_story.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.france24.com/en/20130719-luxembourg-calls-early-elections-after-spy-scandal
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120801150748/http://volitve.gov.si/dz2011/en/index.html to http://volitve.gov.si/dz2011/en/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090527084317/http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/156029.html to http://www.ukranews.com/eng/article/156029.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Israel, 2019

Shouldn't Israel be added now that the upcoming election is a snap election? --Elisfkc (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Snap election or early election?

This article is about snap elections, which are not quite the same thing as early elections (see KarlFrei's post Early elections versus snap elections, above). Personally, I tend to see snap elections as a special form of early elections – ones that are called with little warning. I tried to add the qualifier "with little warning" to the definition to differentiate between a snap election and an early election, but the qualifier has been removed. It now reads "A snap election is an election that is called earlier than the one that has been scheduled", making no distinction between the two. Is there some other way we can make this distinction? What does CapnZapp think? - Polly Tunnel (talk) 11:35, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I would say the first step is to find good sources discussing/defining the difference. If there is one - just armchair-googling "snap vs early election" indicates the two terms are used pretty much interchangeably (by British press at least). CapnZapp (talk) 13:45, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks CapnZapp. Looking outside journalism, I can see that the Institute for Government discusses the rules for "early" elections here but refers to the 2017 election as a "snap" election, calling its announcement "sudden". The Cambridge Dictionary defines a snap election here as "an election that is announced suddenly and unexpectedly". Should we try and include a dictionary definition in the article and cite it? The edit summary for removing the distinction from the article said that: '"with little warning" is personal interpretation. How little is little?"'. The same could be said of the Cambridge Dictionary definition – how sudden is sudden, and how unexpected is unexpected? And is this the "personal interpretation" of a particular dictionary compiler? It doesn't seem obvious to me how we could ever overcome this objection. It would be good if the original objector Akld guy could make a comment. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 16:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I suggest we question our underlying assumption before doing anything else. Are "snap" and "early" really accepted terms with distinct meaning? So far, I don't see it. Best Regards CapnZapp (talk) 17:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm surprised that anyone would have trouble distinguishing the two. I think Polly Tunnel puts it very clearly at the head of this section. DuncanHill (talk) 18:04, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

OED has, under snap- "In Parliamentary usage, as snap bill, snap dissolution, snap division, snap election, snap vote, one obtained or taken unexpectedly or when comparatively few members are present." DuncanHill (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

She links to KarlFrei saying "There appears to be a significant difference between early elections and snap elections." Source please. No, really. Without sources that establish that "snap election" is something else than "early election" there is no conflation, no problem and nothing to be fixed. With them, it should be trivial to untangle the two. So I say again: the first step is to find good sources discussing/defining the difference. Regards CapnZapp (talk) 18:28, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

"It would be good if the original objector User:Akld guy could make a comment." That's an implied criticism of me. Please check out the time zone where I live. I've been asleep through the night and it's now almost 8:00 am as I write this. Akld guy (talk) 19:57, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Good morning :) CapnZapp (talk) 11:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

CapnZapp, Polly Tunnel: Apologies for the late response. I have looked around for sources describing the difference between early elections and snap elections but these are unfortunately difficult to find. The problem is that this is a question of difference between different parliamentary systems, and almost everybody in the world is interested exclusively in their own little system :-) if they are even aware that there are others... Nevertheless, by looking specifically for information about individual countries, the differences become readily apparent. To wit:

• For the UK, it is very well known (and sources can easily be found) that snap elections are called strategically, with some people calling this "the most important single decision taken by a British prime minister".
• For the Netherlands, Wikipedia currently states "If the House of Representatives is dissolved, due to a severe conflict between the House of Representatives and cabinet, or within the cabinet, a snap election takes place as soon as possible, usually after two months to give parties time to prepare." This is completely accurate, apart from the unfortunate choice of wording "snap election"... This text makes clear that these kind of elections are called when the prime minister has no other choice, being unable to continue their work. It involves the prime minister actually offering their resignation to the monarch (however, this is usually not accepted, as the monarch will ask the PM to lead a caretaker government until the next government can be formed, which could end up being led by the same PM).
• For Germany, parliament is legally prohibited from dissolving itself, and the most recent early elections, achieved more or less by a parliamentary trick, led to court cases questioning their very legality.

No doubt, sources for specific additional countries could be found. I hope that this makes clear that there are huge differences between the various systems; I therefore repeat my suggestion that snap elections (the obviously strategic ones) should be separated in Wikipedia from early elections (the more or less forced ones). — Preceding unsigned comment added by KarlFrei (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure you're going to like this, Karl Frei, but: Wikipedia does not accept original research. Just because we know something to be true does not mean it belong on Wikipedia. To be blunt: Wikipedia needs verifiability, not truth. This is why I'm asking for sources. Not sources that detail the individual systems, but specifically sources that does the comparing for us. (Us wikipedia editors doing that is called WP:SYNTHESIS). Therefore I must reluctantly repeat my stance: Unless and until we find these elusive sources we cannot and should not claim there is any difference. Hope that helps CapnZapp (talk) 10:05, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

OK, so any political scientist reading this: please write a paper on this topic, so that we can make Wikipedia more accurate! KarlFrei (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

References