A few days ago, I was worried we would have a Hung Parliament, as a resurgent youth-led voting public scooped up the free offers showered on it by the Labour Party Manifesto. Discussing this some days ago with people in a position to know better, the younger of the two contacts feared that the Conservatives were losing the youth vote (which they did) among other things by being tempted by targeted offers of free transport for the under 25s. He feared the whole of London was lost (most of it was) and that the Conservative leadership did not understand how people thought outside city centres (definitely not so). When we were on our own again my older contact said the younger one was too pessimistic, but the best we could both come up with as a prediction was a small working majority, and even then, it was best not to depend on it. Part of the reason was that in 2017 Labour under Corbyn did very well, which was a shock as their vote firmed up at the last minute, and was not predicted by the polls. Teresa May was a wooden performer, and her Manifesto contained unpopular things, for example a proposal which increased the chance that family homes would have to be sold to pay for social care.

This time the result was far better than expected. His majority is a “stonking” 80 seats, the best result since Thatcher in 1987. England voted Conservative, affronted by a Labour leader who was seen as unpatriotic, disloyal and untrustworthy. Boris was seen as a bit of a rogue, but charming and with a sense of humour. He passed the pub test: many voters thought it be fun to have a drink with him.

The Conservative election machine regained its reputation of being a machine, not a knitting circle. The guiding principle was that, if something was done in 2017, it should not be done again. The Manifesto was kept short, and short on promises, with no hostages to fortune. When Cabinet Members were even slightly off-target, and made comments that could be misinterpreted, for example, that it “was common-sense to leave a burning building” when discussing the Grenfell Tower fire, they were immediately side-lined and never seen again. “Get Brexit done” was repeated ad nauseum until even Labour repeated it. The repetitions became a joke, but it was deadly effective. Focus groups struggled to list what the other parties wanted but everyone, Leaver and Remainer alike, knew what the Tories would do. Lines of command in the election HQ were clear, and the focus on limited objectives relentless. It will be studied carefully in the US. Fear is a good motivator, and even those who were normally confident of victory remained terrified it would all go wrong, like 2017.

Scotland voted for the Scottish National Party, but curiously that does not guarantee they would all vote for separation. Currently they do well out of the Union. Being rebellious need not go the whole way. However, this is a problem.

Northern Island has moved closer to Ireland, with one seat moving to Nationalist (Irish) parties from the Unionist Northern Island (Conservative) cause. Wales moved closer to English Conservatism, dumping traditional Labour in several seats.

Northern Island has never been particularly popular with mainland voters. The English don’t like people who take politics too seriously, still less those who murder their countrymen because of politics. The English would be happy to be shot of Northern Island, and only defend them because they want to remain part of the United Kingdom. Nonetheless, they are seen as shouty and too fond of history and waving the Union Jack. Dumping them would be popular, but won’t happen.

Dumping the Scots would also be popular. Their Parliamentary leader shouts, sides with Labour, and was part of the obstructive faction that blocked Brexit. If Scotland doesn’t want to be part of the Union there is no enthusiasm for wooing them with more money. Who knows, in another decade or two Engerland might just be Engerland.

What are the pointers for the future? Never judge the electorate solely by the people they elect. Being elected goes to the elected’s heads. Some Conservatives believed they were capable of judging what the public really needed, and that what they needed was not what they voted for. They joined Labour’s “destroy Brexit by a thousand delays” plan. (Boris purged them, and they all lost their seats at the election, or did not contest it). Labour believed their own estimates of their personal importance. They promised to respect Brexit and then openly sabotaged it. The Liberal Democrats chose the policy of revoking Brexit. Unwise, undemocratic, unelectable.

The public were having none of it. Whatever they had voted in the 2016 referendum, in 2019 they voted to Leave, either out of conviction about Brexit or conviction that if Parliament asks the people for their opinion, in a once in a lifetime referendum, they should respect the results.

Boris made the difference. The character of the candidate matters. Boris is a Cavalier, not a Roundhead, close to Merry England, the alehouse, and buxom wenches. People understand that. They voted for the normal bloke who likes a bit of a laugh, not the perpetual protester and his pamphlets. Now the Boris team will have a chance to show the electorate that they are worthy of being supported five years from now. One person will be particularly keen to do that. A Share in two revolutions is living to some purpose. Dominic Cummings helped win Brexit 2016 and a Conservative landslide in 2019. The entire team will enjoy the new dawn.