neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on May 6, 2023 9:55:16 GMT
In fairness she cuts a good figure...although wouldn't look out of place on game of thrones
|
|
|
|
Post by jib on May 6, 2023 9:57:41 GMT
An interesting set of results.
To reiterate what I wrote yesterday, measurable progress in key places like Dover, Plymouth and Medway. Election winning form. Good progress for Labour in the Midland and even places like South Gloucestershire and North Somerset. Impressive.
The progress of the Greens continues at pace although they will be concerned at Labour progress in Brighton, losing 13 councillors.
Churn between the wet Tories and Sunak Tories in home Counties of academic interest. Trying to corral the moderate Tories and Faragists under one banner is going to be impossible and doesn't bode well for them.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on May 6, 2023 9:59:28 GMT
Political pledges come and go depending on the landscape but Boris Johnson was always corrupt and a serial liar in his personal life and yet you still voted for him. I would say personal life and "job" are two separate things. Boris had one and only one use ("Get Brexit Done") so was the better option than Hunt when I voted for Boris in CON leadership election (then my local CON MP in GE'19). Politicians only usually become 'pragmatic' (ie rip up pledges/promises) once in power and once Boris had served his purpose then I wanted to "Get Boris Gone" and was 'Ready for Rishi' (voting for him last Summer) Perhaps as soon as Starmer wins GE'24 then Mandelson can organise a coup and get his boy Streeting to replace 'serial liar in his professional life' Starmer. NB I'm a Tory. I expect politicians to lie. Welcome to the Real World - we're all Tories now  PS Might I suggest a new line of attack next time? Pretty sure you/others have mentioned me voting for Boris many times and I've given pretty much the same explanation every time. A liar is a liar, personal life or professional life and Boris Johnson's actions did irreparable damage to the body politic of this country. That was always foreseeable, yet you voted for him despite this and now support Rishi who was his chancellor. I simply point this out because it 'puts into context' your comments on Starmer and to point out politicians are not all the same and we should be able to expect better of them. That expectation is what I hope will lead to Labour winning the general election. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 6, 2023 10:02:57 GMT
In fairness she cuts a good figure...although wouldn't look out of place on game of thrones Bound to be a Lannister then.  |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on May 6, 2023 10:06:16 GMT
In fairness she cuts a good figure...although wouldn't look out of place on game of thrones Bound to be a Lannister then. She also had a great big sword, Sunak needs to watch his step |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on May 6, 2023 10:13:48 GMT
Back to yesterday whatever else we learned from it hopefully it's squashed the rather excitable reports of any Sunak recovery in the polls
A truly awful set of results for the tories
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 6, 2023 10:18:30 GMT
pjw1961 Interesting comments regarding vote numbers. It's also impacted of course by turnout. Noticeable locally where participation rates in Berkhamsted are always higher for some reason. Consequently while Hemel wards were being won with 450 ish voted the seats in Berkhamsted , all won by lib dems were being won with 1000+ votes, also of course impacted by the popularity of the candidate. I'm not entire sure about the less urban aspect as while Dacorum does have rural areas around 140,000 of the 170,000 residents live either in Hemel or Berkhamsted I am coming round to your way of thinking that the Lib Dems may be able to win more seats than looks likely on the basis of the 2019 results. There was a healthy LD revival in Devon (and the new Somerset unitary had already gone that way last year). Middle class areas in the home counties and south east generally are in play and have a lot to dislike about the current version of the Tory party. The best news is that at Westminster level the Lib Dems and Labour scarcely get in each other's way. They are after different seats. There will be no pacts but I suspect we will see a tacit agreement to concentrate resources away from each other's targets. That should worry the Tories. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 6, 2023 10:19:43 GMT
Back to yesterday whatever else we learned from it hopefully it's squashed the rather excitable reports of any Sunak recovery in the polls A truly awful set of results for the tories The attempts to spin it as anything else have been notably desperate and feeble. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 10:20:33 GMT
Trevor, Apropos Green Voters: In Darlington they took their usual modest %ages in the Labour wards but massively increased in the leafier Tory held ones. So while they are, of course, taking votes from the left of Labour, my assessment is that it was Tory-Green switching that delivered their successes. Much of this is local Nimbyism with Greens promising to stop things they can't as developments and contracts etc are too far advanced. Lesson for Labour is that is that we have to be careful with squeeze messaging at the GE as highlighting that only Labour can beat the Tories might move a decent number of first time Green voters back to the Tories, we may only use the squeeze in Labour wards. Thank you for your local info - I didn't want to speak for other parts of the country. There is also an 'inbuilt' contradiction in Green-NIMBYism that Starmer-LAB can copy with some tweaks. Greens want some more housing but are very specific about it being 'environmentally friendly', not on greenbelt, etc. Most locals chez nous 'understand' that means ripping up local CON plans to build lots of new houses as 'genuinely affordable, environmentally friendly' housing would need major central govt changes - something Greens can't change. So vote Green = block housing. Greens can 'officially' blame central govt but with no housing targets set by central govt then Greens can also claim they are keeping leafy areas leafy, and build on their local presence as Green-NIMBY being 'better' than Blue-NIMBY. That could create a problem for Starmer-LAB when they form HMG as LAB can make those central govt changes. However, Starmer might have already thought that through via 'devolution' (community consultation) which will effectively block development. Then when few new houses are built it is not Starmer's fault but those pesky LEs. That is obviously not a solution to the housing problem but the 'art of politics' is knowing which problems you can blame on someone else rather than bother to fix. NB (and cc shevii ) then doing well in LEs doesn't necessarily mean doing well in same local area in a GE - notably not relying on CON 'types' backing Green in a GE (or 'genuine Greens' being 'squeezed' into voting LAB) Mid-Suffolk is an obvious example. Very safe CON seat(s) in a GE whose locals voted in a Green council. We see similar with lots of Orange-NIMBYism examples where folks don't want CON locally but vote for one of the two main parties nationally. Although I don't think there are many CON->LDEM switchers even locally the impact of lower turnout in LEs for both CON and LAB is likely coz a lot of people are not bovvered about local politics (as either they doubt it makes any difference who is in power locally or don't think LEs have enough power to make any change no matter who runs their LE - possibly both reasons!) |
|
|
|
Post by moby on May 6, 2023 10:22:21 GMT
Trevor, Apropos Green Voters: In Darlington they took their usual modest %ages in the Labour wards but massively increased in the leafier Tory held ones. So while they are, of course, taking votes from the left of Labour, my assessment is that it was Tory-Green switching that delivered their successes. Much of this is local Nimbyism with Greens promising to stop things they can't as developments and contracts etc are too far advanced. Lesson for Labour is that is that we have to be careful with squeeze messaging at the GE as highlighting that only Labour can beat the Tories might move a decent number of first time Green voters back to the Tories, we may only use the squeeze in Labour wards. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on May 6, 2023 10:26:04 GMT
I must say that as much as I might bemoan the state of UK politics or wish for Labour to be better and bolder, there's nothing quite like the Tories getting a total shoeing to improve my mood and put a spring in my step We may be stuck with the bastards for a little while longer but everything feels a bit brighter tonight. Had a bit of a difficult day yesterday in some ways but it's amazing how seeing the tories getting a huge kicking genuinely has a huge positive effect on my wellbeing! |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 10:27:32 GMT
Starmer-LAB is not my party but the discussion on 'hung parliament' scenarios shows some folks are aware that LAB didn't do as well as hoped - or claimed by Starmer. Hmm. Surely labour did very well indeed, and did meet expectations. Its a bit disingenuous to claim otherwise. However, it is clear labour could be doing better, and we seem here to have a consensus that what we are seeing is deeply unpopular tories being thrown out, rather than a positive vote for labour. The pattern here suggests a general election result on the lines of 2010, con losing to both lab and lib in different regions. And similarly, where in 2015 con did better than expected because of the collapse of the libs, so we might expect now con will do worse than expected because of recovery by the libs. You mention the administration has deferred any further attempts to reform planning and build more homes, but while this might shore up their short term vote, it has remorselessly also acted to cut off the supply of newly purchased tory voters ever since the supply of giveaway council houses ran out. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 10:35:06 GMT
I would say personal life and "job" are two separate things. Boris had one and only one use ("Get Brexit Done") so was the better option than Hunt when I voted for Boris in CON leadership election (then my local CON MP in GE'19). Politicians only usually become 'pragmatic' (ie rip up pledges/promises) once in power and once Boris had served his purpose then I wanted to "Get Boris Gone" and was 'Ready for Rishi' (voting for him last Summer) Perhaps as soon as Starmer wins GE'24 then Mandelson can organise a coup and get his boy Streeting to replace 'serial liar in his professional life' Starmer. NB I'm a Tory. I expect politicians to lie. Welcome to the Real World - we're all Tories now PS Might I suggest a new line of attack next time? Pretty sure you/others have mentioned me voting for Boris many times and I've given pretty much the same explanation every time. A liar is a liar, personal life or professional life and Boris Johnson's actions did irreparable damage to the body politic of this country. That was always foreseeable, yet you voted for him despite this and now support Rishi who was his chancellor. I simply point this out because it 'puts into context' your comments on Starmer and to point out politicians are not all the same and we should be able to expect better of them. That expectation is what I hope will lead to Labour winning the general election. zzz ZZZ. Sorry but it's getting boring so this will the last reply on the same issue you keep bringing up. See my 'pecking order' of lies post. ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/post/82666/threadPerhaps you expected Covid pandemic leading up to GE'19? I knew Boris liked to 'party' and fully accept his 'partygate' behaviour meant we had to "Get Boris Gone" (as I've repeatedly stated over and over again). He had one job "Get Brexit Done" - which he did (for GB, with Rishi completing the task in NI). St.Rishi of Furlough, hiking corporation tax, etc - puts him to the 'Left' of Reeves on the Economic Axis IMO (but folks can disagree of course) Your opinions of Starmer are your own and I have ANFIW in n=1 person's opinion. I've made my opinion clear and agree with 'Genuine' LAB people who think Starmer has lied his way into his job - although I'm personally glad about a lot of his lies and see Starmer as a Red-Tory (Tory Plan B v2). Although the extent of his lying does cause concern that he might do 'O' turns (as already explained). |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 10:38:38 GMT
In fairness she cuts a good figure...although wouldn't look out of place on game of thrones Bound to be a Lannister then. A Lannister always pays their debts. Including the national debts....? A grand principle of getting millionaires into post in government has always been that they will personally pay for running the government? Shouldnt we be reintroducing that tradition now? |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 6, 2023 10:51:17 GMT
Bound to be a Lannister then. A Lannister always pays their debts. Including the national debts....? A grand principle of getting millionaires into post in government has always been that they will personally pay for running the government? Shouldnt we be reintroducing that tradition now? The Sunak's (especially Mrs) are rich enough to actually have a go! More seriously they could start paying the higher rate of tax rather than 22%; that would help. And how about billionaire monarchs paying for their coronations while we are at it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2023 11:23:42 GMT
Absolutely. Indeed "necessary" lying to the electorate destroys confidence in and credibility of the system itself. The voters then turn to a populist anti-establishment plague on all their houses politician who then persuades the electorate that democracy doesn't work and needs to be replaced. With him/her forever. IMO there is a 'pecking order' for lying. From minor to serious: 1/ White lies with good intentions (eg during War, Covid, etc) 2/ 'Personal life' lies that shouldn't impact professional life 3/ 'Pragmatism' where two issues clash and a pragmatic solution is required 4/ Lying to get a job (eg LAB leader) when the person (ie Starmer) had no intention of keeping the promises made to get the job 5/ As #4 but without even the excuse of #3 (as per Starmer) IMO there are times when #1 is necessary, times when #2-3 are unavoidable (although hopefully rare) and the problem of lying is only in the most serious forms of lying (or in Boris's case so much of #2 that it spilled into his professional life and he had to go) For UKPR2 then I note several people never bother with sources, "edit" them or only use extreme biased sources. All sources are likely to be biased and that doesn't mean they are useless but I'm wasting my time with serial liars on UKPR2. I gave people a chance to change and ended up with a 'Time Out'. So back to ignoring the liars and trolls. Maybe I'll try again with a 'clean slate' opportunity on the next new thread - maybe not? Well I think this is a slippery slope. And I don't think "pragmatism" requires lies-it requires honesty and a transparently declared choice. Of course , politicians are human beings & so afflicted by frailties and flaws. But what is important is that they are accountable to voters for the things they say & promise as their representatives. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on May 6, 2023 11:26:25 GMT
An interesting set of results. To reiterate what I wrote yesterday, measurable progress in key places like Dover, Plymouth and Medway. Election winning form. Good progress for Labour in the Midland and even places like South Gloucestershire and North Somerset. Impressive. The progress of the Greens continues at pace although they will be concerned at Labour progress in Brighton, losing 13 councillors. Churn between the wet Tories and Sunak Tories in home Counties of academic interest. Trying to corral the moderate Tories and Faragists under one banner is going to be impossible and doesn't bode well for them. Lol, I can assure you it's far from academic to the 'sunak' torries or any other tories for that matter. |
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on May 6, 2023 11:27:22 GMT
An interesting set of results. To reiterate what I wrote yesterday, measurable progress in key places like Dover, Plymouth and Medway. Election winning form. Good progress for Labour in the Midland and even places like South Gloucestershire and North Somerset. Impressive. The progress of the Greens continues at pace although they will be concerned at Labour progress in Brighton, losing 13 councillors. Churn between the wet Tories and Sunak Tories in home Counties of academic interest. Trying to corral the moderate Tories and Faragists under one banner is going to be impossible and doesn't bode well for them. I thought the wet Tories did pretty well. Should be good for at least a majority in HOC |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2023 11:31:08 GMT
An interesting set of results. To reiterate what I wrote yesterday, measurable progress in key places like Dover, Plymouth and Medway. Election winning form. Good progress for Labour in the Midland and even places like South Gloucestershire and North Somerset. Impressive. The progress of the Greens continues at pace although they will be concerned at Labour progress in Brighton, losing 13 councillors. Churn between the wet Tories and Sunak Tories in home Counties of academic interest. Trying to corral the moderate Tories and Faragists under one banner is going to be impossible and doesn't bode well for them. I thought the wet Tories did pretty well. Should be good for at least a majority in HOC  Yep-before they start drying themselves. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on May 6, 2023 12:09:31 GMT
Jib just can't bring himself to give credit to the exceptional liberal democrat performance ,instead he's added a new silly name to go with his orange crayon.
7 out of 12 lib dems additional council wins and over 275 new ward wins weren't in the home counties 22 of the lib dems councils aren't in London or the home counties.
Juvenile petulance never a good look.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 6, 2023 12:13:18 GMT
IMO there is a 'pecking order' for lying. From minor to serious: 1/ White lies with good intentions (eg during War, Covid, etc) 2/ 'Personal life' lies that shouldn't impact professional life 3/ 'Pragmatism' where two issues clash and a pragmatic solution is required 4/ Lying to get a job (eg LAB leader) when the person (ie Starmer) had no intention of keeping the promises made to get the job 5/ As #4 but without even the excuse of #3 (as per Starmer) IMO there are times when #1 is necessary, times when #2-3 are unavoidable (although hopefully rare) and the problem of lying is only in the most serious forms of lying (or in Boris's case so much of #2 that it spilled into his professional life and he had to go) For UKPR2 then I note several people never bother with sources, "edit" them or only use extreme biased sources. All sources are likely to be biased and that doesn't mean they are useless but I'm wasting my time with serial liars on UKPR2. I gave people a chance to change and ended up with a 'Time Out'. So back to ignoring the liars and trolls. Maybe I'll try again with a 'clean slate' opportunity on the next new thread - maybe not? Well I think this is a slippery slope. B. And I don't think "pragmatism" requires lies-it requires honesty and a transparently declared choice. C. Of course , politicians are human beings & so afflicted by frailties and flaws. D. But what is important is that they are accountable to voters for the things they say & promise as their representatives. (letters for each point added) A. It is a slope but the slippery element depends on the individual (IMO). No form of lies should be "encouraged" or become the default option but in the case of #1 (white lies) I'll give some non-political examples: - a young child asks for your opinion on a drawing - someone who has invited you for dinner asks your opinion on the dinner - your spouse asks "does my bum look big in this" I doubt many people would be 'brutally' honest in every case B. Happy to say "pragmatism" isn't technically a lie and when a difficult choice between two promises is required then an explantation perhaps exonerates the 'lie' aspect. EG Rishi-Hunt priority #3 is 'Reducing national debt' but circumstances might arise where that doesn't happen (eg as with Covid and the package of measures to ease the pain due to the rise in Energy prices as a result of Putin's war in Ukraine). So breaking a promise/pledge or missing a target is not necessarily a "lie" when a pragmatic choice was required. Certainly an honest explanation of the choice and the reason for breaking a promise/pledge/target makes a difference to just deciding break a promise/pledge/target as the individual never actually meant it in the first place (although that slides down the slope into #4-5) C. Indeed and I myself am a forgiving type, although in the case of Boris then he so clearly broke #2 on multiple occasions as to become "THE" problem and had to go. However, the main point being that what someone does in their personal life should not IMO be a reason to think they are unfit for a job - in some cases it would slide into a form of discrimination to use someone's personal life as a reason to deny them a job. Only when the personal life impacts the ability to perform the job (as per Boris) then something needs to be done - IMO. D. Totally agree. I'd also expand accountability to the leader of party being held to account by their MPs via confidence votes (as happened with Boris and others before him). Then of course every 5yrs voters get to decide if they want a change of colour, although at the moment IMO there is little difference between Red and Blue Torys although I obviously prefer Rishi to Starmer - "better the devil you know".. than a serial liar who will say whatever he thinks will get him the next job up the slippery pole (ie Starmer from the lies he told to become leader of LAB to whatever he says next in the hope of becoming PM). PS We discussed Boris v Hunt many times in the past. IIRC we agreed Hunt would be the better PM but the issue was 'timing'. I doubt Boris ever believed in Brexit but just saw it as a chance to 'queue jump' up the slippery pole of CON MPs. Hunt has been quite the "pragmatist" in his new job so I won't hold his leadership 'promises' against him. Rishi was perhaps too honest in Summer 2022, leading to the Truss error. Truss is an example of someone who perhaps was too honest. Whatever people say about her - she didn't lie - I wish she had! |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 6, 2023 12:25:54 GMT
So, yesterday's results are (almost) all in.
The usual caveat that you should be extremely cautious about extrapolating local results onto a future GE.
For what it's worth, my take on it is that the tories are in trouble - big trouble.
The one factor that stood out for me was tactical voting.
Yes, there may be a nimby element to the green vote - and I have long said that in general there is a certain kind of voter in the leafy outer suburbs (ROC economically, but socially fairly centrist/LOC, who would usually find a home in a tory party led by, say, Major or Clarke, and see the Greens as 'Liberals it's ok to like')......but....
Yes, Labour did well in the largr towns/small cities/northern seats, as you would expect given the polling. The fact that Labour always to 4-5 points worse in locals than in a genral election suggests to me that the current polling - and yes the current polling with less larg Labour leads - is broadly correct, but, for my money, that is not where we need to look.
Look instead to the toriy shires, Surrey, look to Dover, I mean....Windsor of all places.
While in the current political landscape you'd expect Labour to do well in places they've done well before, the sheer scale of the tory rout in places Labour cannot touch, the message is crystal clear. It's ABT (anyone but tory).
Of course, in a GE, the tories will still win some of these places, but, how many depends on the level of tactical voting next year.
There was a tactical voting website set up a week before the locals, pushed heavily on social media, including by one Carol Vorderman (of Countdown fame).
It's there now, and even if taken down, the coding is likely to have already been copied so a copycat site can be set up in no time.
I would imagine it will be pushed strongly on social media, not just a week before, but in plenty of time for the GE.
It (and ABT tactical voting generally) is going to pushed hard. You know it is.
The BBC projector thing had the torie on 224 seats with 26% of the vote share. While I think the tories will end up with more than that (most likely around 32-33%), the level of likely ABT voting in even their hearlands, I think 224 seats is generous.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on May 6, 2023 12:25:58 GMT
pjw1961On an impromptu basis it can work at a local level.Sometimes not standing down is the best method. In my ward there was never any realistic chance of the lib dems winning, at the last three elections the Labour candidates came a distant second behind the tories. By taking an additional 100+ votes compared to the last election , almost certainly from disaffected Tories who were reluctant to switch to Labour, we allowed one of the Labour candidates to win and the other to get close. Before our resident Tory apologist spin doctors leap in to say black is actually white I've already spoken to Barbara the winning Labour candidate to offer her out congratulations and she seemed more than happy with our contribution.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 6, 2023 12:30:46 GMT
Looking through local results emphasised to me again how difficult is to take anything in terms of swing from LG By-Elections in E&W.
The differences between top and bottom candidates on the same slate was over 100 in some cases and over 50 in most.
Nearly all incumbents out-voted their fellow candidates and the alphabet hierarchy impacted the last one in the list for the contenders.
In 10 or so wards the LDs only put one candidate up and in some there were less independent candidates than places available.
In such cases when voters used all their votes the top candidate on the lists comfortably out-scored those lower down.
Indeed the candidate who lost by 11 votes to the Tory incumbent, I mentioned above, was 50 or so votes behind her co-candidates despite her having similar or a bit more visibility in the ward purely down to being lower down the list.
That was the worst case as it arbitrarily determined who missed out but also in a ward where we took one which was our target we made sure the 2nd and 3rd candidates were further down the list and it worked.
(NB - these were stalwart retired former councillors who did this for the team and are well pleased the mid twenties candidate won)
So to By-elections, what base should be used? The vote for the former councillor who created the vacancy which would be misleadingly high if it was the only victorious incumbent from the previous election or low if it was the third winner from a slate.
Also which base line to use for the challenger party, their highest from the previous contest which could be a defeated incumbent who was closer to winning, the average perhaps?
None are satisfactory which makes the Friday morning By-Election results service tricky to draw too much from.
Over a long period a pattern of gains and losses is possibly a better indicator than any attempt at using swing.
NB) Scotland the other way round perhaps due to STV as the most popular party will generally pick up the seat as they have more 1st preferences.
ON contextualises and guides on what can, if anything, be deduced sometimes from the transfers and number of first preferences etc which is welcome.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on May 6, 2023 12:52:18 GMT
Savanta poll for Itv of young people 85% of 18-25 year olds would vote to rejoin the European union, the nearly dead who stole their grandchildren's rights must be delighted. youtu.be/3bdtgRrmIao |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 6, 2023 12:54:58 GMT
There was a tactical voting website set up a week before the locals, pushed heavily on social media, including by one Carol Vorderman (of Countdown fame). It's there now, and even if taken down, the coding is likely to have already been copied so a copycat site can be set up in no time. I would imagine it will be pushed strongly on social media, not just a week before, but in plenty of time for the GE. It (and ABT tactical voting generally) is going to pushed hard. You know it is. The BBC projector thing had the torie on 224 seats with 26% of the vote share. While I think the tories will end up with more than that (most likely around 32-33%), the level of likely ABT voting in even their hearlands, I think 224 seats is generous. I am all for tactical voting as an inevitable feature of FPTP, but these websites have to be taken with a pinch of salt. The one I looked at got a number of wards in Braintree badly wrong through not appreciating that the Greens have been in decline here since the 2019 elections - although that website is highly unlikely to have any effect on the final results. In GE terms, basing the TV recommendations on the 2019 GE results could be significantly in error in some cases. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2023 12:58:27 GMT
So I said earlier I was interested in Bracknell Forest and whether the anti-Tory coalition worked. Here is the result: Labour 22 (+18) Conservative 10 (-27) Lib Dem 7 (+7) Green 2 (+2) Wow! One wonders if the idea will penetrate the brains of Starmer, Davey and the Green leadership, that not running candidates against each other pays dividends? Nope, thought not. Surely the enormity of the results in Bracknell Forest will not be lost on the movers and shakers of the various parties. And I suspect the results will make the blood run cold in the upper echelons of the Conservative Party. The previous council was: CON 37 LAB 4 LD 1 LAB put up 24 candidates and 22 won, LD put up 12 (7 won) and Green 7 (2 won). CON contested every ward and won 10. The vagaries of FPTP can be astonishing. CON got 45% of the vote and 10 seats. LAB took 32% and won 22 seats, giving them overall control of the council. Some food for thought there, methinks. democratic.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=109&RPID=61655469 |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on May 6, 2023 13:11:24 GMT
As is typical, you misrepresent people to fit your narrow definition of politics where the only political identities are "Scottish Nationalist" (or Welsh or Irish) or "British Nationalist". I don't want the "bloody celts" to "shut up and do as they are told". I have no desire to tell anyone how to vote nor any ability to make them do so. Every vote has to be campaigned for hard in a democracy, Scottish ones as much as English. But it is simply a statement of fact that a vote for the Conservatives in Scotland is a vote for a Conservative government UK wide; a vote for Labour is a vote for a non-Conservative government UK wide; and a vote for the SNP is a vote for a party that will prioritise Scottish independence and would be happy to put the Conservatives in power if it helps that cause. That is the reality. It is amusing that you accuse others of partisanship when you are one of the most partisan posters on this site. I fully expect a lot of anti-Labour propaganda for the next year or so - and I understand why, it makes sense in a Scottish political context. , I wouldn't take it too personally, periodically oldnat takes a pop at one of us along these lines, when all you are stating is essentially the bleeding obvious. The SNP and their supporters have every right to push for indy in any way they see fit - and if you gave them the option of a Tory govt at Westminster and another indy vote they would bite your hand off. I also have no doubt that for most of their supporters/members if they lived in England they would probably vote Labour in a GE.
In regards to the SNP, I have flagged for sometime that the prominence of the indy/constitutional issue for them at a time when voters across the UK are concerned more about bread and butter cost of living issues could prove to be counter-productive. That may be a factor in the current polling we are seeing in Scotland atm - but we will have to wait till the GE to see if that is the case.
Personally, I think post Brexit the SNP actually has a strong case for another ref, which will become stronger if they continue to dominate electorally both on terms of Westminster and Scottish Parliament elections. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 6, 2023 13:34:38 GMT
And how about billionaire monarchs paying for their coronations while we are at it. Ah you can't really do that. Either you have a monarch and fund it fully, or you get rid. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on May 6, 2023 13:36:17 GMT
lululemonmustdobetter I don't believe the Tories have much of a 'core vote' any more - the softies had gone to the Lib Dems for good and the loony right to UKIP or whatever they call themselves these days. The idea that people who didn't bother to vote in the locals will be queueing up to vote for Starmer in 2024 is unlikely I think. I think we'll see a low turnout in the general election. , I suspect both Lab and Con still have what could be called a core vote, in terms of those like myself who still identify as 'Labour' or 'Tory' voters. For both it probably accounts for some where between 20-25% each of the electorate in England and Wales. There is a lot of evidence / commentary along the lines that Blair's success was based on the fact that he wasn't objectionable enough to disgruntled Tory voters, so they weren't motivated to turn out to vote or were more comfortable voting LD. Starmer may/may not benefit from a similar effect.
I would guess currently the split of those who didn't vote yesterday but will vote in the GE would actually favour Labour (see posts on Lab % lower in Locals to Ge etc), and if the turnout is low I think there is a good chance it will be disproportionately 2019 Tory VI staying at home.
I think you will also see Labour having greater success in converting areas they gained in last night to parliamentary gains than the LDs or Greens will. While I think there is a reasonable possibility that the LDs will gain at least 10 seats, but 20-30 gains will I think be a stretch. Partly this is due to the fact that as the '19 Tory VI coalition unwind, an element of which is Lab leaning Leave voters, this will raise the Lab vote share and Lab will also most likely benefit by a general national rise in its vote share. There are still also a fair portion of Labour voters who wont vote tactically for the LDs due to the coalition days. These will most likely be limiting factors in the South of England, where in many constituencies the Tory vote will most likely fall be low 50%, but the non-Tory vote will be split. As I mentioned last night, there was no real sign of the success of either Lab or LD being based on the collapse of the others votes due to tactical voting. |
|
