On July 4, the United Kingdom will hold its first general election since 2019. All 650 seats in the House of Commons are up for grabs, and Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's Conservatives, who have been in power for 14 years, look like long shots to retain their parliamentary majority. Public opinion polling has consistently shown the opposition Labour Party in the lead. Sunak's decision in May to call the snap election months earlier than required by law was likely made to capitalize on positive economic data, which Conservatives hope will turn around their flagging fortunes and prevent a Labour takeover. 

How does the electoral system work?
The U.K.'s lawmakers are elected individually by regional constituencies, as with the U.S. district system. To win a constituency, candidates need only win the most votes, even if it's a plurality rather than a majority. Unlike the U.S., the U.K. has more than two parties capable of consistently winning seats in the national legislature, including the Scottish National Party and two left-of-center parties: the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. 

The multiparty nature of the system makes it possible that no one wins a majority in the House of Commons. This has happened twice this century and is called a "hung Parliament." However, current opinion polling suggests the opposition will win a healthy majority, with forecasts predicting anywhere from 394 to 475 seats for leader Keir Starmer's Labour Party. 

How does the snap election affect things?
In contrast to American presidential elections, the U.K.'s elections happen very quickly. When a snap election is called, it starts a clock of 25 working days from the king's official dissolution of Parliament to the election. The decision to hold an election dissolves Parliament after a short period known as the washup, when members can take care of any last-minute business. 

The most pressing issue in the election is the economy, which remains sluggish compared to other advanced democracies. Since the Covid-19 pandemic, the U.K. has experienced higher inflation and slower growth than most countries in the Eurozone. That, combined with high interest rates, has put the electorate in a sour mood. Whether they will ultimately toss the Conservatives out, though, is up to voters on July 4.

Through the '90s, Disney reigned supreme as animation king. Then Pixar came along to give the behemoth a run for its money, beginning with the 1995 release of "Toy Story." 

But Pixar has not had a hit since 2019's "Toy Story 4." And a few weeks ago, the Walt Disney Co.-owned animation studio announced layoffs of 14% of its staff. Now, Pixar will cut back on the number of streaming series it produces and focus on big-screen films again.

How it lost its way
There is no single reason Pixar has faltered in recent years but rather a combination of culprits. For one, the company lost a number of its major players. And the pandemic caused an additional problem, as people grew accustomed to watching movies at home when theaters were closed. 

Pixar made 2020's "Soul" and follow-ups "Luca" and "Turning Red" available to stream on Disney+ rather than holding them for theater release, and all three performed poorly. The decision "robbed the company of the prestige and pageantry that had accompanied its big-screen debuts," said Thomas Buckley at Bloomberg. 

Finally, Pixar came up against a glut of competition from fellow animation studios like Dreamworks ("Shrek") and Illumination ("Despicable Me"). "There's just so much out there, and it's harder and harder to surprise people," Pete Docter, the chief creative officer at Pixar, said to Bloomberg. 

New strategy
"Inside Out 2" hits theaters on June 14 and will test the company's new strategy. The studio plans to focus on sequels and spin-offs with "mass appeal," said Pixar President Jim Morris to Bloomberg. Though spin-offs are not always successful — "Lightyear" was the first "Toy Story" movie to fail — Morris and Pixar executives believe making movies that are less personal and more universal will coax audience members back into seats. 

This strategy may not be foolproof. Many of Pixar's past hits were, arguably, specific and personal, and yet viewers did not need to be single fathers to connect with "Finding Nemo" or sci-fi nerds to love the melancholic robot-mance of "Wall-E." Pixar has made the personal into the universal several times over. But only time will tell if the studio's new approach has legs.