|
|
Post by jimjam on May 9, 2023 14:09:43 GMT
Shevii, I would not be one of those with a Labour persuasion who disagreed as the last time all seats were contested in the best baseline imo.
I set about trying to work out a notional vote share in Darlington but soon gave up as only the Greens and Labour contested all seats and the LDs put up one or none in unwinnable wards, plus 4 seats had independents with 3 of those being decent challenges.
Also, should we take the highest, lowest, average or aggregated votes per party in each ward, multiplying where there wasn't a full slate?
I ended up looking at the straight Tory-Labour contests and whilst very imperfect concluded we beat the national swing by around 2%.
We all think it is due to our hard work but some might be the Brexit unwind impact, anyone claiming to know with any certainty is either mendacious of deluded.
|
|
Dave
Member
... I'm dreaming dreams, I'm scheming schemes, I'm building castles high ..
Posts: 818
|
Post by Dave on May 9, 2023 14:13:23 GMT
Are people are looking forward to Eurovision on Saturday? No. Next question.  |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 9, 2023 14:13:51 GMT
I get the temptation on Boris. But honestly_I think it would be a disaster. He wouldn't stick to a subordinate brief having been PM. Sunak would be out of his mind to do it imo. Yes, one danger is that he'd be a loose cannon, making up policy on the hoof and so on. However if they get desperate enough... I should have added in my reply to patrickbrian that "public opinion" when the decision MIGHT be made will matter. Obviously some people who would never vote CON will say whatever but I'm pretty sure CCHQ can run proper focus groups and opinion polling to get the view of people who MIGHT vote CON. Desperate times might come and then, and only then, desperate measures might be worth considering. Sadly I don't have the gift of being able to see the future that some people seem to think they have and, as has been noted by Arch-LAB partisans in the past, then it's not for people who would never vote X to really comment on what X might do (although that "rule" doesn't seem to apply in reverse  ) I doubt I'd ever vote LAB, but if they were to: do something about housing; scrap the pension triple lock; scrap the Barnett Formula (or give Scotland independence); ensure Corbyn and the Far-Left never comes back; never adopt* PR; and stick with "continuity CON" WRT to most other stuff (eg 1p cut in Income Tax I expect we'll see next Spring, Rwanda scheme, etc) then I might. "Never say never" * Whilst I'm glad Starmer has turned Tory then I don't trust Mr Flip Flop given how many pledges and promises he keeps breaking. The Orange Tories will do anything for a red briefcase but might again demand another referendum on PR to prop up a minority govt so I won't be voting LAB in GE'24 for sure - as I don't trust Starmer to not do an "O-turn" on his "long held opposition" to PR (given he seemed to like PR back in Jan'20) |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on May 9, 2023 14:16:52 GMT
In terms of said core values, the liberal-quake or liberal consesus, isn't yet the maority of voters, the 'anti-woke' stuff still plays well with a chunk of, mostly, older voters, but, that will change. Id give it 20 years tops. Such a change does not necessarily nean that on economic issues the majority will be LOC, some will still be ROC, the change happening mainly on the social axis, not the fiscal one, hence my thinking that we could see a new ROC party if the tories don't change. I see where you're coming from, but not all youth movements or fashionable positions become mainstream, and some cause backlashes. For instance hippies and punks seemed important for a period. The current trans fashion reminds me of a couple of years when PIE was being treated seriously around 1980. A lot of people (not just my generation) think that 'taking the knee' is ridiculous and Greta Thunberg is a joke. The Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion people damage their own cause (IMO) and as they are seen as lefties it could end up damaging Labour even if Starmer denounces them. I have come up with one of my theories 🤔. Because so many people play online games where they can be anything they like - different gender, an elf or whatever - it spills over into real life to the extent that they deny reality. For instance the 'Not My King' placards. You may not like the monarchy, or Charles but I'm sorry dear but he IS your king, like it or not. Same thing about blokes putting on dresses and thinking that they are a woman. They may not like being a man, they might prefer to have been a woman, but chromosomes are facts. Not so much in this country AFAIK but in Australia and USA there are people who think they are 'sovereign citizens'. Again, sorry but you're not unless you can find a bit of unclaimed land somewhere. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,362
|
Post by Danny on May 9, 2023 14:18:49 GMT
It's now beyond any doubt at all that covid deaths are being widely undercounted, largely due to the long term mortality effects. I dont know how that is possible, because you for one have never produced any evidence able to quantify a risk from covid. yeah, yeah, and clever people voted remain while thickos voted leave because those with degrees were much more likely to vote remain. Nope...its a correlation without evidence of causation. And there really arent any incidence figures either. What we have known from 2020 is that people with risk factors for many other diseases are also much more likely to get bad covid. hence we knew in 2020 that bad covid correlates with high incidence of other serious diseases. As i remarked, getting covid badly is quite a good lab test for high risk from other illnesses. Just give people covid deliberately, and if it turned out bad, then you knew they would be prone to other illnesses too. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 9, 2023 14:29:00 GMT
In terms of said core values, the liberal-quake or liberal consesus, isn't yet the maority of voters, the 'anti-woke' stuff still plays well with a chunk of, mostly, older voters, but, that will change. Id give it 20 years tops. Such a change does not necessarily nean that on economic issues the majority will be LOC, some will still be ROC, the change happening mainly on the social axis, not the fiscal one, hence my thinking that we could see a new ROC party if the tories don't change. I see where you're coming from, but not all youth movements or fashionable positions become mainstream, and some cause backlashes. For instance hippies and punks seemed important for a period. The current trans fashion reminds me of a couple of years when PIE was being treated seriously around 1980. A lot of people (not just my generation) think that 'taking the knee' is ridiculous and Greta Thunberg is a joke. The Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion people damage their own cause (IMO) and as they are seen as lefties it could end up damaging Labour even if Starmer denounces them. I have come up with one of my theories 🤔. Because so many people play online games where they can be anything they like - different gender, an elf or whatever - it spills over into real life to the extent that they deny reality. For instance the 'Not My King' placards. You may not like the monarchy, or Charles but I'm sorry dear but he IS your king, like it or not. Same thing about blokes putting on dresses and thinking that they are a woman. They may not like being a man, they might prefer to have been a woman, but chromosomes are facts. Not so much in this country AFAIK but in Australia and USA there are people who think they are 'sovereign citizens'. Again, sorry but you're not unless you can find a bit of unclaimed land somewhere. There are some young white males who are getting pretty angry* about "quotas" so it is certainly possible that the "pendulum" swings back on some of the "liberal" stuff of the recent past (eg "positive" discrimination which is still discrimination). Fortunately some of the daftest stuff seems to have been nipped in the bud in UK - although Scot.Gov want to spend a load of taxpayer money fighting their (probably) lost cause. On the 'Not My King' protest then I agree with Lammy (although admit to being surprised that I do!) One thing to consider is not just the right to protest but the right to allow people to enjoy something. I wonder if people would object to say a/ some religious types (like Tim Farron) trying to ruin a "pride" event by saying "gay sex is a sin"? b/ anyone trying to ruin Notting Hill Carnival for whatever small grievance they might have about that? I'm not against people objecting to the monarchy or anything else but a coronation is a "once in generation" event and the actual event itself shouldn't be ruined by a small group of people who object. I think the Police have now said they were a bit "heavy handed" but I would expect the same treatment be given to anyone who tried to ruin the two examples I've given. Let people enjoy stuff - live and let live. If anyone doesn't want to enjoy a coronation, pride event or carnival then do something else that day - don't try to ruin it for those who want to enjoy a specific event - simples. * non-young / non-white / non-male types perhaps can't "empathise" with the "quotas" but can understand it is discrimination and hence wrong. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2023 14:39:53 GMT
Whatever happens in the next GE, the tories are doomed long term unless there is a serious sea change at their core. That doesn't mean a free run for Labour ong term as a fair chunk of the country are economically ROC. Perhaps a new ROC party will emerge long term (without a tory sea change, I think this could well happen). In the 1950's-1970's, what we call the 'post war consensus' was more or less followed by both main parties. Several on here have commented that the tory Chamberlain government was economically to the left of the Blair government....and certinly did better at, for example, house building. We now have a new consensus, the "post brexit" one. We see from polling, post brexit, younger voters have moved sharply towards liberal/left values on social issues, kick started IMO by brexit, but, amplified by climate change and to a lesser extent, by thing such as Black Lives Matter, the Me Too movement and more. Some questions lend themselves at this point... 1. Surely there have been sizeable youth movements before? Indeed there have. To give one example, along with over 150,000 others, I was on the Anti-Nazi League carnival of 1994. A demonstration march through London followed by a concert in Hyde Park. Admittedly the bands were the main draw for a fair few that attended, headliners including The Levellers and Manic Street Preachers, but, the there was next to nothing in the mainstream media. I got a friend to video the news programmes and looked through the next day's papers. There was almost no coverage.
Compare to today where footballers take the knee and everyone knows who Greta is.2. People generally get more right wing as they get older. Firstly, I don't think that is necessarily tue. The data for this assertion is generally that from the end of the second world war - there are some from the start of that period that are still around today.
Also, take, for example, Brexit. There are a chunk of voters that voted against the then EEC in the 1970s in their 20s/30s that voted for Brexit again in their 60s/70s. The largest anti-europe faction by generation both times.
The winter of discontent pushed some people towards ROC, the Iraq war didn't really help the tories as, while it was Blair that did it, opposition came from the left, not the right, then, we have Brexit.
Also, I would suggest that attitudes, while of course being shaped by events, are formed early on. Yes some have 'lightbulb moments', both LOC->ROC and ROC->LOC, later in life, but, many don't. People change their mind who to vote for in an individual election, they may change their mind on one particular issue, but, core values, once instilled, often don't change.In terms of said core values, the liberal-quake or liberal consesus, isn't yet the maority of voters, the 'anti-woke' stuff still plays well with a chunk of, mostly, older voters, but, that will change. Id give it 20 years tops. Such a change does not necessarily nean that on economic issues the majority will be LOC, some will still be ROC, the change happening mainly on the social axis, not the fiscal one, hence my thinking that we could see a new ROC party if the tories don't change. Not convinced by some of this:- Getting "Young people" on the street is easier than getting them to vote in a GE. What is the difference between economically LOC & ROC voters?. Don't they just want an economic policy which improves their financial prospects ? Do they care about private/public sector politics ? As for Parties having to change-they all do. Even the Labour Party ! They all have to because times change. These are the top three "most important issues" from MORI's tracker for the last 50 years :- March 2023-Inflation-Economy-Healthcare March 2018-EU/CM-Economy/Education/Housing-Immigration March 2013-Immigration-Economy-Education March 2008-Crime-Economy-Education March 2003-Defence-Education-Crime March 1998-Education-EU.CM-Economy March 1993-Crime-Economy-Education March 1988-Crime-Economy-Education March 1983-Crime/Defence/Education Sept 1974 EU/CM-Education-Crime Trends over that period ?:-Education has stopped being a major issue. So has the EU. Other stuff comes and goes-but The Economy is always up there. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on May 9, 2023 14:55:40 GMT
Danny - "I dont know how that is possible, because you for one have never produced any evidence able to quantify a risk from covid." I think what you meant to say was "I dont know how that is possible, because you for one have never produced any evidence able to quantify a risk from covid apart from c 100+ papers showing statistical risk ratios, Kaplan-Meyer curve analyses, odds ratios etc for the identified risks". Probably just a typo. "Nope...its a correlation without evidence of causation. And there really arent any incidence figures either." Well it doesn't help if you refuse to read the c 100+ papers showing statistical risk ratios, Kaplan-Meyer curve analyses and odds ratios etc for the identified risks etc etc. If you don't read the data, you just make yourself look a complete fool. We actually have multiple biomarkers taken from actual people, we have copious data from before and after high resolution scans of multiple organ systems, biopsy's and post mortem data. There's a whole host of hard evidence of what covid does. And yes, we really do have some very strong data on incidence too. But you need to read the papers you are provided with to understand it, but instead you choose to be bone idle and ignorant. "What we have known from 2020 is that people with risk factors for many other diseases are also much more likely to get bad covid. hence we knew in 2020 that bad covid correlates with high incidence of other serious diseases. As i remarked, getting covid badly is quite a good lab test for high risk from other illnesses. Just give people covid deliberately, and if it turned out bad, then you knew they would be prone to other illnesses too." Again Danny, what you are really missing is all those papers I have provided you with that find a link between asymptomatic covid and systemic long term consequences. I keep explaining this to you, but there have been multiple studies into outcomes as diverse as arterial hardening, heart inflammation, precursor brain biomarkers for Alzheimers, impaired liver function, mental health impairments, and long covid, where cohorts have been tested and tracked over time, and where asymptomatic cases have been associated with adverse long term outcomes. You are more at risk of poor outcomes from covid if you have higher risks for other diseases, but asymptomatic covid in previously healthy individuals also correlates with adverse outcomes. Same story - read the papers instead of pontificating about subjects you choose to remain ignorant on, and then you will understand.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 15:31:24 GMT
Are people are looking forward to Eurovision on Saturday? No. Next question. I am looking forward to Saturday, if that helps |
|
alurqa
Member
Freiburg im Breisgau's flag
Posts: 781
|
Post by alurqa on May 9, 2023 15:31:30 GMT
we are supposed to be joining CPTPP though Al, which is reputedly not very compatible with our having a customs Union with the EU. (It’s possible there might be some kind of deal in the future between EU and CPTPP though) Yes, that's true. And the motivation is allegedly that this part of the world has billions of people and their economies are growing fast, well faster than the 'sclerotic', as they would like to describe Euopeans. That of course ignores the far lower per capita cost per head of many of the members of the CPTPP. And that fast-growing economies are typically small. The real motivation, of course, is to move our economy so far away from Europe that we can't rejoin. Rejoining, or at least joining the Single Market, would massively improve our economic outlook, as the self-imposed barriers to trade would be removed, giving the entrepreneurs a chance to start trading again, as they did before. The gains would be much greater and show up more quickly. And that is what the brexiters are afraid of. We already have much of the cultural knowledge and experience here still to make that happen. To make it happen on a large scale with the CPTPP would mean working with at least hundreds of thousands of people from these countries, and the reason for leaving the EU was we don't like foreigners.
You can't trade if you don't talk to people. And to do that effectively we need to go over there, and they need to come over here; much easier when they are only 35km away. The brexiters want the former but not the latter.
The trade deal with Australia, for instance. Who did that? And the Welsh
hill farmers have seen that their interests are being shafted because
she (the woman you can't truss) wanted to get a deal in the bag.
As to an EU-CPTPP deal, if that did happen where would we stand? A deal with 500m people v a deal with 60m people. I can't see us winning that. But like I say these things don't matter. The issue was and is about foreigners.
|
|
|
|
Post by thylacine on May 9, 2023 15:40:40 GMT
With results in from all 230 councils, the Conservatives lost 957 seats, with Labour gaining 643, the Lib Dems gaining 415 and Greens gaining 200. This is something that winds me up a bit. These are figures from the Guardian which are quite different to those from the BBC. Am I right in assuming this is because of differences in base line , counting wards that have had boundaries changed or had intervening by elections? It was the same with the swing figures being quoted on the night which even seemed to vary within the same news source Guardian take theirs from AP who note the changes from the day before the election, whereas BBC go on the figures when they were last fought. So if a party lost a by election in the last 4 years or if someone defected then the Guardian regards that as already lost to the party they represented 4 years ago and there isn't a gain. I think we had a discussion last year and I was firmly of the view that a comparison with 4 years ago is more relevant than the day before the election whereas others (of a Labour persuasion) disagreed. It was noticeable that last year Guardian was better than BBC for Labour gains, and I can't help feeling a few contributors regarded the Guardian view as the right one, so hopefully they haven't changed their minds now :-) I'm still of the opinion that BBC figures are more meaningful in showing a trend. Shevii it was probably me who asked last year as well. Apologies,the old brain cells obviously struggling a bit 😂. Interesting that again the Guardian figures increase the labour gains . They do however decrease the Tory losses so it's swings and roundabouts. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 15:43:37 GMT
we are supposed to be joining CPTPP though Al, which is reputedly not very compatible with our having a customs Union with the EU. (It’s possible there might be some kind of deal in the future between EU and CPTPP though) Yes, that's true. And the motivation is allegedly that this part of the world has billions of people and their economies are growing fast, well faster than the 'sclerotic', as they would like to describe Euopeans. That of course ignores the far lower per capita cost per head of many of the members of the CPTPP. And that fast-growing economies are typically small. The real motivation, of course, is to move our economy so far away from Europe that we can't rejoin.
Well it’s part of the argument, but leaves out how more countries are set to join, potentially growing in size beyond the EU, and how the market suits our strengths in services more. There is also the possibility of a deal with the US. And of course, faster-growing economies are indeed often growing from a lower base, but the faster growth means they will get to a higher base more quickly. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 15:48:29 GMT
we are supposed to be joining CPTPP though Al, which is reputedly not very compatible with our having a customs Union with the EU. (It’s possible there might be some kind of deal in the future between EU and CPTPP though)
Rejoining, or at least joining the Single Market, would massively improve our economic outlook, as the self-imposed barriers to trade would be removed, giving the entrepreneurs a chance to start trading again, as they did before. The gains would be much greater and show up more quickly. And that is what the brexiters are afraid of. We already have much of the cultural knowledge and experience here still to make that happen. To make it happen on a large scale with the CPTPP would mean working with at least hundreds of thousands of people from these countries, and the reason for leaving the EU was we don't like foreigners.
Well, people might say it will massively improve our outlook, but when you consider that before Brexit, trade with the EU was only worth 8% of GDP, to begin with. and the OBR think it will cost 4% of GDP long term, then it puts things into proportion a bit, and a chunk of that projection was apparently is due to expected lost immigration on leaving the EU but we seem to be maintaining a lot of immigration anyway. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 9, 2023 15:59:47 GMT
R&W's latest "Blue Wall" poll: Labour 36% (+2) Conservative 32% (–) Liberal Democrat 23% (-1) Reform UK 5% (–) Green 2% (-3) Other 1% (–) redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-blue-wall-voting-intention-7-may-2023/Of note, then despite doing very well in the "Blue Wall" LE results then Greens are 2% (-3) and LDEM 23% (-1) in Westminster VI. LAB+LDEM+Green = 61% (-2) so bit of a zzz ZZZ with minor shifts between ABCON parties. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 16:07:03 GMT
we are supposed to be joining CPTPP though Al, which is reputedly not very compatible with our having a customs Union with the EU. (It’s possible there might be some kind of deal in the future between EU and CPTPP though) You can't trade if you don't talk to people. And to do that effectively we need to go over there, and they need to come over here; much easier when they are only 35km away. The brexiters want the former but not the latter. This was the subject of some debate on the old board, the issue of gravity: that trade is easier when with countries sited closer to us. I confess I’m not sure about it myself, but there are some ways technology might help. For example we are handy at digital services which don’t necessarily suffer as much gravity, and also the potential for AI to do things like real-time translation which might mean you need less presence overseas. And it depends in part on how much our companies can shift to selling stuff that suits that trade zone more, is more niche etc. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on May 9, 2023 16:11:25 GMT
R&W's so-called Blue Wall is a key battleground between Con LDs and Lab . The 42 seats polled include nearly all the LDs' targets in London and the South, plus about 15 Lab targets.
R&W's last 'Blue Wall' poll was unusually good for the LDs and this rather masks the fact that their 23% still an improvement the 20%ish they had been averaging in the same seats. Fieldwork date is given as 7May (Sunday) so should reflect any post Local Elections effect.
Compared to GE2019, this one is:
Lab 36% (+15)
Con 32% (-18)
LibDem 23% (-4)
Swing Con>Lab 16.5% compared to around 13% in recent GB polls.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 16:16:54 GMT
we are supposed to be joining CPTPP though Al, which is reputedly not very compatible with our having a customs Union with the EU. (It’s possible there might be some kind of deal in the future between EU and CPTPP though)
The trade deal with Australia, for instance. Who did that? And the Welsh
hill farmers have seen that their interests are being shafted because
she (the woman you can't truss) wanted to get a deal in the bag.
As to an EU-CPTPP deal, if that did happen where would we stand? A deal with 500m people v a deal with 60m people. I can't see us winning that. But like I say these things don't matter. The issue was and is about foreigners.
It is about foreigners for some people, but there are left-wing issues with trade deals that are not about foreigners. A trade deal like CPTPP doesn’t have free movement, but is still an issue from a left-wing perspective as it bakes in right-wing globalist economics. * There are some who objected not to immigration, but to the composition of it, that it was too biased towards to the low-waged. Immigration has remained high but did change in composition somewhat* bringing in more professionals etc., which is one reason why there might not have been the complaints you might expect. This is before considering how in practice it is often the middle class - some of them Remainers - who keep the foreign folk from rising up the ladder, from getting timely health care etc. * and a more left-wing policy of full employment renders this issue of free movement rather moot from a left wing perspective. There might still be an issue with things like exporting jobs though, which is why the left also have issue with things like the banning of capital controls that you tend to get with trade deals. |
|
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 9, 2023 16:17:57 GMT
With results in from all 230 councils, the Conservatives lost 957 seats, with Labour gaining 643, the Lib Dems gaining 415 and Greens gaining 200. This is something that winds me up a bit. These are figures from the Guardian which are quite different to those from the BBC. Am I right in assuming this is because of differences in base line , counting wards that have had boundaries changed or had intervening by elections? It was the same with the swing figures being quoted on the night which even seemed to vary within the same news source Guardian take theirs from AP who note the changes from the day before the election, whereas BBC go on the figures when they were last fought. So if a party lost a by election in the last 4 years or if someone defected then the Guardian regards that as already lost to the party they represented 4 years ago and there isn't a gain. I think we had a discussion last year and I was firmly of the view that a comparison with 4 years ago is more relevant than the day before the election whereas others (of a Labour persuasion) disagreed. It was noticeable that last year Guardian was better than BBC for Labour gains, and I can't help feeling a few contributors regarded the Guardian view as the right one, so hopefully they haven't changed their minds now :-) I'm still of the opinion that BBC figures are more meaningful in showing a trend. I agree with you (and the BBC) about using 2019 as the benchmark as the intervening period can include defections, expulsions and the like over which the electorate got no say. What is curious about those numbers is not the difference in the Conservative losses, which is explained, but that AP seem to have conjured up about 100 additional Labour gains from somewhere. Unless it is a traditional Guardian misprint. The BBC had Labour +537 I think. |
|
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 9, 2023 16:24:28 GMT
Just a thought on the suggestion that the economy will improve before the election and this will help the government. It is worth recalling that John Major and Kenneth Clarke oversaw a very substantial improvement in the economic position in the two years before 1997 and all it did was hand the incoming Labour government a relatively benign economic position.
Sometimes the electorate have a settled will that the government's time is up, and IMO that seems to be where we are. The main drag on it is that Starmer is no Blair (indeed arguably Davey is no Ashdown either), but fortunately Sunak is even less popular.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 16:28:49 GMT
Just a thought on the suggestion that the economy will improve before the election and this will help the government. It is worth recalling that John Major and Kenneth Clarke oversaw a very substantial improvement in the economic position in the two years before 1997 and all it did was hand the incoming Labour government a relatively benign economic position. Sometimes the electorate have a settled will that the government's time is up, and IMO that seems to be where we are. The main drag on it is that Starmer is no Blair (indeed arguably Davey is no Ashdown either), but fortunately Sunak is even less popular. I’ve argued myself before now, that there was a settled will, noting the polling drop after Black Weds., and how Tories never recovered. However… Major didn’t have much of a majority and the rebels were able to keep making mayhem. Also, there was all the sleeze stuff. And despite a recovery there was all that negative equity etc. So one wonders if all that choked off any chance of a polling recovery? (This is rather tentative however…) |
|
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 9, 2023 16:37:47 GMT
Just a thought on the suggestion that the economy will improve before the election and this will help the government. It is worth recalling that John Major and Kenneth Clarke oversaw a very substantial improvement in the economic position in the two years before 1997 and all it did was hand the incoming Labour government a relatively benign economic position. Sometimes the electorate have a settled will that the government's time is up, and IMO that seems to be where we are. The main drag on it is that Starmer is no Blair (indeed arguably Davey is no Ashdown either), but fortunately Sunak is even less popular. I’ve argued myself before now, that there was a settled will, noting the polling drop after Black Weds., and how Tories never recovered. However… Major didn’t have much of a majority and the rebels were able to keep making mayhem. Also, there was all the sleeze stuff. And despite a recovery there was all that negative equity etc. So one wonders if that choked off any chance of a polling recovery? (This is rather tentative however…) I seem to recall plenty of Tory mayhem and sleeze recently, and in place of negative equity we have had rising interest rates and rampant inflation. While the headline rate of the latter will come down that will still leave a lot of increase baked into prices and people have not had rises in their income to match it. In addition the public services are in a state of near collapse. There is not a lot of joy around at the moment and for a government that has been in power for 13 years they are not going to escape the blame. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 16:42:59 GMT
I’ve argued myself before now, that there was a settled will, noting the polling drop after Black Weds., and how Tories never recovered. However… Major didn’t have much of a majority and the rebels were able to keep making mayhem. Also, there was all the sleeze stuff. And despite a recovery there was all that negative equity etc. So one wonders if that choked off any chance of a polling recovery? (This is rather tentative however…) I seem to recall plenty of Tory mayhem and sleeze recently, and in place of negative equity we have had rising interest rates and rampant inflation. While the headline rate of the latter will come down that will still leave a lot of increase baked into prices and people have not had rises in their income to match it. In addition the public services are in a state of near collapse. There is not a lot of joy around at the moment and for a government that has been in power for 13 years they are not going to escape the blame. yes there has been plenty of sleeze and indeed rebellion and look what it did to their polling! If that is able to stop under Sunak it might help, thiugh his own affairs attract some flak, but yes as you say the economic prospects are worrying. I wonder quite how much the economics matter, because Tories were able to prosper electorally despite austerity. But they did boost property prices. It seems to me that Sunak isn’t doing nearly enough economically, but then I’m amazed at what Tories have gotten away with in the past. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on May 9, 2023 16:50:57 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on May 9, 2023 16:51:46 GMT
Labour lead is nineteen points in latest results from Deltapoll.
Con 28% (-1)
Lab 47% (+3)
Lib Dem 9% (-2)
Other 16% (-)
Fieldwork: 5th - 9th May 2023
Sample: 1,550 GB adults
(Changes from 28th April - 2nd May)
|
|
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 9, 2023 16:59:01 GMT
I seem to recall plenty of Tory mayhem and sleeze recently, and in place of negative equity we have had rising interest rates and rampant inflation. While the headline rate of the latter will come down that will still leave a lot of increase baked into prices and people have not had rises in their income to match it. In addition the public services are in a state of near collapse. There is not a lot of joy around at the moment and for a government that has been in power for 13 years they are not going to escape the blame. yes there has been plenty of sleeze and indeed rebellion and look what it did to their polling! If that is able to stop under Sunak it might help, thiugh his own affairs attract some flak, but yes as you say the economic prospects are worrying. I wonder quite how much the economics matter, because Tories were able to prosper electorally despite austerity. But they did boost property prices. It seems to me that Sunak isn’t doing nearly enough economically, but then I’m amazed at what Tories have gotten away with in the past. Well in 2015 the effects of austerity had not yet fully worked through and 2017 and 2019 were dominated by Brexit. I think in 2024 the economy and public services are going to be front and centre. The polls certainly suggest they are the highest profile issues. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on May 9, 2023 16:59:24 GMT
Starmer refusing to rule out a coalition with the liberal democrats in the event of a hung parliament.
Personally I think irrespective of a hung parliament a coalition would be nice to see as it would be one of the exceptionally rare events where we actually had an administration elected by the majority of voters.
|
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 17:02:33 GMT
yes there has been plenty of sleeze and indeed rebellion and look what it did to their polling! If that is able to stop under Sunak it might help, thiugh his own affairs attract some flak, but yes as you say the economic prospects are worrying. I wonder quite how much the economics matter, because Tories were able to prosper electorally despite austerity. But they did boost property prices. It seems to me that Sunak isn’t doing nearly enough economically, but then I’m amazed at what Tories have gotten away with in the past. Well in 2015 the effects of austerity had not yet fully worked through and 2017 and 2019 were dominated by Brexit. I think in 2024 the economy and public services are going to be front and centre. The polls certainly suggest they are the highest profile issues. yeah, I mean it does seem to be Labour’s to lose. I just like to consider the less likely possibilities, just in case. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 9, 2023 17:07:42 GMT
R&W's so-called Blue Wall is a key battleground between Con LDs and Lab . The 42 seats polled include nearly all the LDs' targets in London and the South, plus about 15 Lab targets. R&W's last 'Blue Wall' poll was unusually good for the LDs and this rather masks the fact that their 23% still an improvement the 20%ish they had been averaging in the same seats. Fieldwork date is given as 7May (Sunday) so should reflect any post Local Elections effect. Compared to GE2019, this one is: Lab 36% (+15) Con 32% (-18) LibDem 23% (-4)Swing Con>Lab 16.5% compared to around 13% in recent GB polls. R&W do handy tracker graphs and I note very little CON'19->LDEM VI. They do also show 'tactical voting' %s and those perhaps justify people using 50% in EC's model. However, I'll once again pick a seat that shows a lot of tactical voting occurred in GE'19 and in many seats there isn't a lot of tactical voting left to squeeze. Guildford (change from GE'17) CON 44.9% (-9.7%) xCON Ind: 7.4% (+7.4%) LDEM: 39.2% (+15.3%) LAB: 7.7% (-11.3%) I picked Guildford as it shows the "problem" in a few specific seats where someone became Ind* but stood in GE'19. I wouldn't like to assume that the votes for xCON Ind should be "reassigned" to CON'19 as a base for changes in GE'24 but that appears to be what EC's model assumes? EC's prediction with no tactical voting being a CON hold in Guildford - possible but unlikely IMMHO. www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Guildford* In a different example they do at least show David Gauke GE'19 in a seat that will see significant boundary changes but it does again look like their "base" is reassigning xCON to CON. www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/seatdetails.py?seat=Hertfordshire%20South%20WestThe "new" seats in Hertfordshire have been discussed a few times. With boundary changes; the xCON issue; LDEM having different "appeal" in a NIMBY LE v national GE it's not obvious voters will "work out" who the best placed ABCON option is in quite a few seats. Hence CON might win most of the Herfordshire seats (St.Albans staying LDEM, LAB winning in Stevenage the two obvious exceptions). Surrey and Berkshire have some similar issues** as well but my 30mins trying to see where and why various models come up with different "predictions" is over for today. ** EG Wokingham. Phillip Lee was xCON who turned LDEM (rather than running as Ind) but came from the neighbouring seat of Bracknell as I "assume" LDEM thought he has more chance in Wokingham than in Bracknell? Not easy to "guess" (ie make assumptions in a model) for the various MP shuffling that occurred into GE'19. |
|
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 9, 2023 17:09:35 GMT
Starmer refusing to rule out a coalition with the liberal democrats in the event of a hung parliament. Personally I think irrespective of a hung parliament a coalition would be nice to see as it would be one of the exceptionally rare events where we actually had an administration elected by the majority of voters. I can hear jib warming up his coloured pens now ... |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on May 9, 2023 17:13:08 GMT
Starmer refusing to rule out a coalition with the liberal democrats in the event of a hung parliament. Personally I think irrespective of a hung parliament a coalition would be nice to see as it would be one of the exceptionally rare events where we actually had an administration elected by the majority of voters. This could be very useful for Labour. If Starmer arranged a trade deal with the US, for example, he might even get the Lib Dems to announce it. \jib |
|
)
