Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Can Johnson convince that he’ll keep the Tories in power? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,715
edited June 2022 in General
imageCan Johnson convince that he’ll keep the Tories in power? – politicalbetting.com

One of the problems about winning a big General Election majority is that it creates a large group of MPs who came in last time and feel very insecure whenever the party gets into troubled waters. Many of the surprise winners had to endure the huge disruption in their lives that becoming an MP entails and quite a large proportion never really believed they would be there in the first place.

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Test
  • Options
    Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,400
    First

    (Alas?)
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,199
    I suspect Johnson is safe as long as Tory MPs can't see an obviously better successor. Sunak's spectacular implosion has really solidified his position. He'd need to see Tory prospects slipping quite a bit more for his MPs to decide that he is so toxic that literally anyone would be better. Will the happen? It might well, but not imminently.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,623
    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,761
    Fifth rate. Like Bozo.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,056
    People with monkeypox should self-isolate for 3 weeks and have a smallpox vaccine.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61546480
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,623
    Definitely no queues.

    Disaster charity drafted in to rescue lorry drivers stuck in post-Brexit queues
    RE:ACT Disaster Response has agreed a £180,000 six-month contract with Kent County Council to ease stuck truckers’ nightmare waits to board ferries and Eurotunnel shuttles

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/t-27028421
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,203
    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable
  • Options
    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136
  • Options
    Of course if Starmer does go because of beergate, or if Starmer loses the next General Election, then we'll be able to say that Johnson has only faced discredited figures like Livingstone, Corbyn and Starmer as opposed to their new leader.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,254
    Excl: Jake Berry tells me colleagues are jostling to bring back the Northern Board of the Conservative Party to make sure the Tories can appeal to both Red Wall and traditional voters.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/where-is-our-minister-for-the-north-asks-red-wall-mp-jake-berry-2xcvmhh7p

    Group could develop separate policy but key is bringing back a Cabinet-level job specifically focussed on the north, Berry says.

    He said: “Frankly, if we don't win seats in the north then Boris Johnson is not going to be prime minister.”
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Conspirators might feel this is their least worst shot at a change of bojo. Even he is going to learn a minuscule amount from his mistakes and not create any brand new hostages to fortune, and once we are into 2023 you get the whole Too close to a GE thing in his favour. So they might go for it despite the lack of slam dunkitude.
  • Options

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,623
    Andy_JS said:

    People with monkeypox should self-isolate for 3 weeks and have a smallpox vaccine.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61546480

    Good luck with that. I don't suppose it will do the NHS much good if staff have to self-isolate for three weeks as well.
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    Mr. JohnL, while a failing of the incumbent, it's also worth noting May did sod all planning in the event of her deal not going through. That didn't exactly make the situation easier.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Nonsense. Despite HY attacking Red Wall Tory voters as socialists, they will all turn back out to do their christian and patriotic duty and re-elect Boris to a majority of 704. Huzzah!
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,463

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,861

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    I am of the opinion that any polling that shows the greens getting 17 seats at the next election to be somewhat dubious quite frankly. When the results a poll predicts are that unbelievable it throws the whole thing into doubt.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,623

    Mr. JohnL, while a failing of the incumbent, it's also worth noting May did sod all planning in the event of her deal not going through. That didn't exactly make the situation easier.

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,619

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Though a lot of the more honest, reflective ones must know that they're probably there for one term anyway- a bit like the class of '83. So their best personal strategy is to squeeze as much status out of these five years as they can, which entails sucking up to Big Dog.

    It's the MPs on the next danger level down- who lose if Johnson carries on like this but have a chance under AN Other- who are more interesting. Do we know who and how numerous they are? Do they know?

    And if there is a window between "too early" and "too late" (there might not be), can they push Bozza out through it?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,017
    Mr. JohnL, it remains baffling why he didn't.

    It would have been entirely legitimate, *and* to his own great advantage.

    Instead of the referendum being about current membership or a determined style of departure, it became "Do you like the EU?" [of course, even then, it was massively winnable but for the suicidal incompetence of the Remain campaign].
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,254

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,155

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    And while it is certainly true that the situation is not irrecoverable, surely "something must change" for the post-2019 trend to reverse. I don't believe that this deep into a Government, "swingback" is really a thing; we're not in the midterm blues, we're at the fin-de-siecle.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,965
    Andy_JS said:

    People with monkeypox should self-isolate for 3 weeks and have a smallpox vaccine.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61546480

    It is good that we still have stocks of the vaccine.
    While this seems far from the worst version of monkeypox - there is a strain in Africa which appears to have a mortality rate as high as 30% - it looks as though it can be quite dangerous in children.

    Some of us are old enough to have had smallpox vaccinations - I got mine on the airport tarmac in Corfu in the early 70s - and they might still be effective.
  • Options
    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    And while it is certainly true that the situation is not irrecoverable, surely "something must change" for the post-2019 trend to reverse. I don't believe that this deep into a Government, "swingback" is really a thing; we're not in the midterm blues, we're at the fin-de-siecle.
    Swingback was a thing in both 1997 and 2010 so why wouldn't it be a thing today?

    Even fin-de-siecle swingback still exists.

    If the swing is strong enough then swingback won't be sufficient to reverse the damage, that happened in 2010 and 1997, even though there was swingback the swing away had been too much for the government to survive.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,689
    edited May 2022
    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    Good point. As part of LD training we were always reminded that the paper more LD voters read was the Daily Mail, just because it had such a large circulation compared to say something like the Independent.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,619
    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    And while it is certainly true that the situation is not irrecoverable, surely "something must change" for the post-2019 trend to reverse. I don't believe that this deep into a Government, "swingback" is really a thing; we're not in the midterm blues, we're at the fin-de-siecle.
    Well quite.

    The really bad unpopular stuff has barely started to kick in yet.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,203
    edited May 2022
    President Biden confirms the US will defend Taiwan if China invades after Russia's invasion of Ukraine

    https://twitter.com/spectator/status/1528653617313505280?s=20&t=UjIM7UWuwwhLf8Zd0i4G5A
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,203
    edited May 2022

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    Rather too many would not votes there
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,965
    Where's @GaryL ?

    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1528650438714662912
    Due to the high losses of armored vehicles during the fighting, the command of the Russian army was forced to opt for obsolete T-62 tanks from storage to staff and form reserve battalion tactical groups to be deployed to Ukraine, @GeneralStaffUA reported in its May 23 update.
  • Options
    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,930
    Applicant said:

    Johnson has shown he can beat discredited Labour figures like Livingstone and Corbyn.

    Livingstone, for one, is mostly discredited because Boris beat him. Twice.

    And in any case, as any sports fan knows, you can only beat what's put in front of you.

    Indeed! I don't remember Livingstone being "discredited" in 2008?
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,254
    Blog updated: deep state at war means photos will land within ~24-48 hours, monkeypox, nasal vaccines, 🛒 already briefing against Barclay
    https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/snippets-4-and-ama-1200-13-may-hundreds?s=w
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,203

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Some not all and they only won their seats due to Boris and Brexit, get rid of Boris now Brexit is done and they might all go
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,689
    HYUFD said:

    President Biden confirms the US will defend Taiwan if China invades after Russia's invasion of Ukraine

    https://twitter.com/spectator/status/1528653617313505280?s=20&t=UjIM7UWuwwhLf8Zd0i4G5A

    Another of several positive consequences of the war in Ukraine. Shame we had to have a war to make these gains. More to come hopefully with changes in Russia and Belarus. Fingers crossed.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,056
    FPT

    Excellent post from TSE, but I just wanted to flag up one point right at the end, where the Alternative Vote system was flagged up as 'Primus Inter Pares'. Presumably meant to imply that would be the optimal choice. Actually AV is in no way a proportional voting system - it is a slight improvement perhaps on our current First Past the Post, which as TSE points out often produces bizarre and inequitable outcomes. To give just one example (figures are from memory but I think they're in the right ballpark) - in I think the 2010 general election, on a similar vote share, getting approx 4 million votes, the SNP had something like 50 seats and UKIP had none. (I'm no apologist for UKIP, being the precise opposite in my political views, but it's a scandal that those voters didn't get the representation they deserved). Because of course UKIPs votes were spread around many constituencies, and the SNPs all concentrated in the Scottish constituencies. I could go on - I recall in the 1980s the LibDems were often not that far behind in percentage vote from Labour, but typically got around a tenth of the seats.

    So bringing in proportional representation would be a consummation devoutly to be wished - at least that would be my view. The argument against is that it makes it less likely to get majority governments, but why should a party gaining in the mid 30s percentage vote end up with an ability to do what it likes, when two thirds of the voters voted for different parties? However AV would in no way take this forward - it is only a very slight improvement if that on FPTP in terms of proportionality. STV would be the way to go, or some other genuinely proportional system, and many parts of the UK are already using it very successfully in their elections (blowing out of the water the desperate argument 'it's too complicated for voters to understand').

    You say AV would be a slight improvement on FPTP in terms of proportionality but at an election like 1997 it would have delivered an even more disproportionate result. Labour would have won a majority of more than 200 seats instead of 179 because the Tories would have lost even more seats which they won with less than 50% of the vote.
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    edited May 2022

    Mr. JohnL, while a failing of the incumbent, it's also worth noting May did sod all planning in the event of her deal not going through. That didn't exactly make the situation easier.

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.
    That's correct, if Cameron was trying to resolve the EU issue. But he wasn't - he was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Some not all and they only won their seats due to Boris and Brexit, get rid of Boris now Brexit is done and they might all go
    That's not the only reason they won their seats.

    I've said this repeatedly but the Red Wall has been demographically turning Tory for years. Its housing more than Brexit or Boris that is behind the fall of the Red Wall and that remains true.

    Some Red Wall Tory MPs might remain even if the Tories lose the election and go into Opposition, some northern seats that were only narrowly won in 2010 are now safe Tory seats.

    Meanwhile thanks to the collapsing home ownership in the South due to your NIMBY policies the South is now swinging more to Labour. Quite frankly, good, the Tories losing NIMBY Councils that have blocked their own young residents from being able to get built and own a home of their own would be karmic justice. 👍
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Scott_xP said:

    Blog updated: deep state at war means photos will land within ~24-48 hours, monkeypox, nasal vaccines, 🛒 already briefing against Barclay
    https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/snippets-4-and-ama-1200-13-may-hundreds?s=w

    Bit pointless posting a link to paid content that nobody wants to pay for. And Cummings is a busted flush, photos incoming within 48 hours is a call anyone could make.

    And that trolley thing is feeble
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,155

    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    And while it is certainly true that the situation is not irrecoverable, surely "something must change" for the post-2019 trend to reverse. I don't believe that this deep into a Government, "swingback" is really a thing; we're not in the midterm blues, we're at the fin-de-siecle.
    Swingback was a thing in both 1997 and 2010 so why wouldn't it be a thing today?

    Even fin-de-siecle swingback still exists.

    If the swing is strong enough then swingback won't be sufficient to reverse the damage, that happened in 2010 and 1997, even though there was swingback the swing away had been too much for the government to survive.
    1997 was definitely a methodological problem (I think there's plenty of discussion of that). 2010 was very interesting - because while there was a substantial decrease in the Tory lead from the peaks in 2008 (roughly comparable to the time from now to the next election), the "something that changed" (to my point above) was the dramatic increase in the LD vote share from ~15% to ~23%.

    It's the "something that changes" that impacts what happens. In this case that could help either Labour or the Tories, and the "swing(back)" could be in either direction.
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Some not all and they only won their seats due to Boris and Brexit, get rid of Boris now Brexit is done and they might all go
    That's not the only reason they won their seats.

    I've said this repeatedly but the Red Wall has been demographically turning Tory for years. Its housing more than Brexit or Boris that is behind the fall of the Red Wall and that remains true.

    Some Red Wall Tory MPs might remain even if the Tories lose the election and go into Opposition, some northern seats that were only narrowly won in 2010 are now safe Tory seats.

    Meanwhile thanks to the collapsing home ownership in the South due to your NIMBY policies the South is now swinging more to Labour. Quite frankly, good, the Tories losing NIMBY Councils that have blocked their own young residents from being able to get built and own a home of their own would be karmic justice. 👍
    BIB: This is, of course, literally the definition of the Red Wall - seats that demographically should have turned Tory but were for cutural and historical reasons still Labour.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403
    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,819
    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    That is correct.

    However, it requires someone capable of doing the recovery.

    Any names on the list?

    ( I suspect that self-serving, dilettante, complacent, incompetent, dishonest arse-sitters need not apply.)
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,989
    Nigelb said:

    Where's @GaryL ?

    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1528650438714662912
    Due to the high losses of armored vehicles during the fighting, the command of the Russian army was forced to opt for obsolete T-62 tanks from storage to staff and form reserve battalion tactical groups to be deployed to Ukraine, @GeneralStaffUA reported in its May 23 update.

    Ha ha. They’ll last about three minutes in the field against NLAWs. It almost seems a waste of a good modern weapon.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,965
    Nigelb said:

    Where's @GaryL ?

    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1528650438714662912
    Due to the high losses of armored vehicles during the fighting, the command of the Russian army was forced to opt for obsolete T-62 tanks from storage to staff and form reserve battalion tactical groups to be deployed to Ukraine, @GeneralStaffUA reported in its May 23 update.

    The thing is far more of a deathtrap than the T72.
    Its armour can be defeated even by old Soviet RPGs, and it is slow.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-62
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,689
    Andy_JS said:

    FPT

    Excellent post from TSE, but I just wanted to flag up one point right at the end, where the Alternative Vote system was flagged up as 'Primus Inter Pares'. Presumably meant to imply that would be the optimal choice. Actually AV is in no way a proportional voting system - it is a slight improvement perhaps on our current First Past the Post, which as TSE points out often produces bizarre and inequitable outcomes. To give just one example (figures are from memory but I think they're in the right ballpark) - in I think the 2010 general election, on a similar vote share, getting approx 4 million votes, the SNP had something like 50 seats and UKIP had none. (I'm no apologist for UKIP, being the precise opposite in my political views, but it's a scandal that those voters didn't get the representation they deserved). Because of course UKIPs votes were spread around many constituencies, and the SNPs all concentrated in the Scottish constituencies. I could go on - I recall in the 1980s the LibDems were often not that far behind in percentage vote from Labour, but typically got around a tenth of the seats.

    So bringing in proportional representation would be a consummation devoutly to be wished - at least that would be my view. The argument against is that it makes it less likely to get majority governments, but why should a party gaining in the mid 30s percentage vote end up with an ability to do what it likes, when two thirds of the voters voted for different parties? However AV would in no way take this forward - it is only a very slight improvement if that on FPTP in terms of proportionality. STV would be the way to go, or some other genuinely proportional system, and many parts of the UK are already using it very successfully in their elections (blowing out of the water the desperate argument 'it's too complicated for voters to understand').

    You say AV would be a slight improvement on FPTP in terms of proportionality but at an election like 1997 it would have delivered an even more disproportionate result. Labour would have won a majority of more than 200 seats instead of 179 because the Tories would have lost even more seats which they won with less than 50% of the vote.
    Firstly I would just like to comment on @Rainbowmerlin . Just 2 posts so far and both excellent, and not because I necessarily agree with them, but because they are well argued. Looking forward to many more.

    Re your point @AndyJS, I agree, however one mitigating point is that AV tends to be only more disproportionate when one side is a clear winner already. That of course doesn't justify under representation of the losers so I would prefer STV.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,697
    Nigelb said:

    Where's @GaryL ?

    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1528650438714662912
    Due to the high losses of armored vehicles during the fighting, the command of the Russian army was forced to opt for obsolete T-62 tanks from storage to staff and form reserve battalion tactical groups to be deployed to Ukraine, @GeneralStaffUA reported in its May 23 update.

    T-62 is a souped up T-55 - it was made obsolete by Chieftain & M60!

    This is like the British Army raiding Bovington and using the Centurions and Conqueror from the exhibit.
  • Options
    Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,400
    edited May 2022
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    That is correct.

    However, it requires someone capable of doing the recovery.

    Any names on the list?

    ( I suspect that self-serving, dilettante, complacent, incompetent, dishonest arse-sitters need not apply.)
    well thats PB fanbois told!...

    :smiley:
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,254
    The Daily Mail has become so transparently desperate in its support for B Johnson it might- perhaps- be losing its potency over some readers and the BBC…perhaps. https://twitter.com/thattimwalker/status/1528501443166085125
  • Options
    BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 18,822
    edited May 2022
    mwadams said:

    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    And while it is certainly true that the situation is not irrecoverable, surely "something must change" for the post-2019 trend to reverse. I don't believe that this deep into a Government, "swingback" is really a thing; we're not in the midterm blues, we're at the fin-de-siecle.
    Swingback was a thing in both 1997 and 2010 so why wouldn't it be a thing today?

    Even fin-de-siecle swingback still exists.

    If the swing is strong enough then swingback won't be sufficient to reverse the damage, that happened in 2010 and 1997, even though there was swingback the swing away had been too much for the government to survive.
    1997 was definitely a methodological problem (I think there's plenty of discussion of that). 2010 was very interesting - because while there was a substantial decrease in the Tory lead from the peaks in 2008 (roughly comparable to the time from now to the next election), the "something that changed" (to my point above) was the dramatic increase in the LD vote share from ~15% to ~23%.

    It's the "something that changes" that impacts what happens. In this case that could help either Labour or the Tories, and the "swing(back)" could be in either direction.
    Swing could be in either direction but swingback occurred both times.

    Yes there was a methodological problem in 1997 but that doesn't remove the fact that significant swingback occurred from the midterms to the election day. The swingback wasn't enough since the swing away by the midterms was so catastrophic for the Tories that the decision was already made, but there was still swingback even with the methodological issues.

    Again in 2010 there was swingback too. Yes there was an LD surge in the election campaign, but there almost always is and the polls exaggerated it. However from early 2008 to the election day there was a very real swingback to Labour and away from the Tories which was sufficient to deny the Tories an overall majority.

    In 2009 the Tories were polling a double-digit poll lead in almost every single poll, most poll leads were in the teens and there were as many 20+ as there were in the high single digits. In 2010 swingback occurred before the Lib Dem surge and the lead was narrowed to single digits long before the first debate and the rise of the Lib Dems.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,861
    Applicant said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
    Apart from the EU would have refused to negotiate so even if he had wanted to Cameron could not of put a brexit on the table and said that it what you will get as when the time came who knew what the EU would agree to or not.
  • Options
    VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,438
    HYUFD said:

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    Rather too many would not votes there
    Why would the Greens and the LibDems co-operate as proposed if it gave Labour a 136 seat majority?

    What benefit does it give them?

    Yes it gets rid of the Conservatives but it replaces them with a larger Labour majority which could be worse.

  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,819
    edited May 2022

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Though a lot of the more honest, reflective ones must know that they're probably there for one term anyway- a bit like the class of '83. So their best personal strategy is to squeeze as much status out of these five years as they can, which entails sucking up to Big Dog.

    It's the MPs on the next danger level down- who lose if Johnson carries on like this but have a chance under AN Other- who are more interesting. Do we know who and how numerous they are? Do they know?

    And if there is a window between "too early" and "too late" (there might not be), can they push Bozza out through it?
    I think most of them should have 2 terms - depending very much on how they have dug themselves in. It depends on the underlying demographics surely - I can see Gedling (which is nearly part of Nottingham, very marginal) swinging back to Lab, but probably not Ashfield (Lab 3rd, and AI party strong) or Mansfield (Ben Bradley very well dug in), for example. Not sure about eg Erewash (large Con majority), as I do not know the demographics well there.

    How many Class of 83 were booted out in 1987?

    (In toto Tories only lost 13 MPs in 1987, and gained 9).
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,036
    Applicant said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Some not all and they only won their seats due to Boris and Brexit, get rid of Boris now Brexit is done and they might all go
    That's not the only reason they won their seats.

    I've said this repeatedly but the Red Wall has been demographically turning Tory for years. Its housing more than Brexit or Boris that is behind the fall of the Red Wall and that remains true.

    Some Red Wall Tory MPs might remain even if the Tories lose the election and go into Opposition, some northern seats that were only narrowly won in 2010 are now safe Tory seats.

    Meanwhile thanks to the collapsing home ownership in the South due to your NIMBY policies the South is now swinging more to Labour. Quite frankly, good, the Tories losing NIMBY Councils that have blocked their own young residents from being able to get built and own a home of their own would be karmic justice. 👍
    BIB: This is, of course, literally the definition of the Red Wall - seats that demographically should have turned Tory but were for cutural and historical reasons still Labour.
    However. It is not how it is commonly used.
    There are dozens more which didn't go Tory in 2019 so could by this definition.
    In more common usage, however, there are plenty of "Red Wall" seats which are actually just marginals. They simply went Tory because they won an 80 seat majority.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,635
    Andy_JS said:

    FPT

    Excellent post from TSE, but I just wanted to flag up one point right at the end, where the Alternative Vote system was flagged up as 'Primus Inter Pares'. Presumably meant to imply that would be the optimal choice. Actually AV is in no way a proportional voting system - it is a slight improvement perhaps on our current First Past the Post, which as TSE points out often produces bizarre and inequitable outcomes. To give just one example (figures are from memory but I think they're in the right ballpark) - in I think the 2010 general election, on a similar vote share, getting approx 4 million votes, the SNP had something like 50 seats and UKIP had none. (I'm no apologist for UKIP, being the precise opposite in my political views, but it's a scandal that those voters didn't get the representation they deserved). Because of course UKIPs votes were spread around many constituencies, and the SNPs all concentrated in the Scottish constituencies. I could go on - I recall in the 1980s the LibDems were often not that far behind in percentage vote from Labour, but typically got around a tenth of the seats.

    So bringing in proportional representation would be a consummation devoutly to be wished - at least that would be my view. The argument against is that it makes it less likely to get majority governments, but why should a party gaining in the mid 30s percentage vote end up with an ability to do what it likes, when two thirds of the voters voted for different parties? However AV would in no way take this forward - it is only a very slight improvement if that on FPTP in terms of proportionality. STV would be the way to go, or some other genuinely proportional system, and many parts of the UK are already using it very successfully in their elections (blowing out of the water the desperate argument 'it's too complicated for voters to understand').

    You say AV would be a slight improvement on FPTP in terms of proportionality but at an election like 1997 it would have delivered an even more disproportionate result. Labour would have won a majority of more than 200 seats instead of 179 because the Tories would have lost even more seats which they won with less than 50% of the vote.
    You can't test a new system in this way. A new system changes how both parties and voters operate.

    AV has one big merit - it allows scope for new entrants/minority parties to slog their way up the tree by abolishing the 'wasted vote argument. And that is all it does. I like it.

    Unlike strict PR it also provides a fairly high degree of defence against ultra extremes clawing their way into parliament. For myself I don't want 2 or 3 fascists and Stalinists in parliament. I want zero.

  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,036

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    If that is so then this is the end. Byoootiful friend.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,619

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    And in a lot of cases, the government does manage to arrange for the worst economic pain to be a over before the election. The fall of 1991 was followed by green shoots in 1992. The credit crunch pain was in late 2008 and early 2009, with a bit of a recovery by 2010. EdIsPM was plausible when the economy was stagnating in 2012, but not when it was quite perky in 2014/5.

    A Conservative win in 2024 (and notice that nobody is really talking about autumn 2023 for the next election any more) depends on the economy going bad and rebounding in time to be noticed before Mr, Mrs and Mx Voter go to the polls. It's not possible, but the timings look awfully tight.
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Though a lot of the more honest, reflective ones must know that they're probably there for one term anyway- a bit like the class of '83. So their best personal strategy is to squeeze as much status out of these five years as they can, which entails sucking up to Big Dog.

    It's the MPs on the next danger level down- who lose if Johnson carries on like this but have a chance under AN Other- who are more interesting. Do we know who and how numerous they are? Do they know?

    And if there is a window between "too early" and "too late" (there might not be), can they push Bozza out through it?
    I think most of them should have 2 terms - depending very much on how they have dug themselves in. It depends on the underlying demographics surely - I can see Gedling (which is nearly part of Nottingham, very marginal) swinging back to Lab, but probably not Ashfield (Lab 3rd, and AI party strong) or Mansfield (Ben Bradley very well dug in), for example. Not sure about eg Erewash (large Con majority), as I do not know the demographics well there.

    How many Class of 83 were booted out in 1987?

    (In toto Tories only lost 13 MPs in 1987, and gained 9).
    Wiki has a list.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1987_United_Kingdom_general_election#Incumbents_defeated

    I count 17 one-term MPs out of 27 Tory losses.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,203

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Some not all and they only won their seats due to Boris and Brexit, get rid of Boris now Brexit is done and they might all go
    That's not the only reason they won their seats.

    I've said this repeatedly but the Red Wall has been demographically turning Tory for years. Its housing more than Brexit or Boris that is behind the fall of the Red Wall and that remains true.

    Some Red Wall Tory MPs might remain even if the Tories lose the election and go into Opposition, some northern seats that were only narrowly won in 2010 are now safe Tory seats.

    Meanwhile thanks to the collapsing home ownership in the South due to your NIMBY policies the South is now swinging more to Labour. Quite frankly, good, the Tories losing NIMBY Councils that have blocked their own young residents from being able to get built and own a home of their own would be karmic justice. 👍
    Except that isn't really true. After all home ownership in 2015 or 2017 in those red wall seats was not massively different from 2019. However they stayed Labour in 2015 and 2017 only going Conservative in 2019 due to Boris and Brexit. On current polls most of the redwall seats though will go back to Labour now Brexit has been done and Corbyn gone with Boris the best hope of holding the remainder.

    The South isn't swinging to Labour at all outside London. Indeed as the local elections proved most gains in the South from the Tories were by the Liberal Democrats, Greens and Residents' Associations all opposed to excess building in the greenbelt.

    London might need more affordable homes built to reduce the swing to Labour, the South however needs fewer homes built in the countryside and greenbelt as Gove has recognised after Chesham and Amersham etc, hence he has ended zoning
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    Swingback comes from where it always comes from - the opposition, having spent several years merely criticising the government (which is always easy and usually popular) get to an election campaign and have to put themselves forward as an alternative government with some actual policies. This invariably turns off a number of people - whether that number if larger or smaller then becomes the key factor.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403
    Applicant said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
    The big irony being that had Cameron and Osbrown stayed in office then it really would have just been project fear. There would have been a managed exit with a sane trading arrangement to follow. Instead Call Me Dave walked, Osbrown got the sack and we ended up creating a post-Brexit settlement that fear became reality and the authors of the oven-ready deal are now trying to scrap it because it would be "self-harm" to implement any further.
  • Options
    LDLFLDLF Posts: 146
    edited May 2022
    I'd love to see an analysis of the below points by someone in command of the numbers:

    - In which seats did the Brexit Party not stand aside in the last election?
    - How many votes did the Brexit Party receive in these seats?
    - Which way are these voters likely to go in the next election?

    If there is Tory comeback in the next election the above may play a role in it.

    P.S. I agree that Livingstone was not 'discredited' until after Johnson beat him the second time. I would pinpoint the 'Hitler was a Zionist' interview as the moment he could be categorised in the same group as Corbyn.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,513
    edited May 2022

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    Look at the opinion polls. Swingback will come from those Tory 2019 voters who currently tell pollsters they don't know who they will vote for.

    If they've not made the leap to say that they'll vote Labour or Lib Dems during mid-term then it's because they're looking for an excuse to vote Tory to stop Labour. They will be provided with ample such reasons during an election campaign.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403
    Pagan2 said:

    Applicant said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
    Apart from the EU would have refused to negotiate so even if he had wanted to Cameron could not of put a brexit on the table and said that it what you will get as when the time came who knew what the EU would agree to or not.
    The UK never used the tools available to it. State aid? Officially banned yet various other countries would do it with gay abandon and worry about a slap on the wrists once the steel works was safe. Freedom of Movement? Simply implement a national ID card and require everyone to register them with their employers. The rules allowed countries to deport freeloaders after 90 days, so we could have done as the likes of Belgium were doing.

    Incidentally, I have to talk up the government's success in the latter area. The UK workforce has shrunk by 600k since 2019/20, a triumph for all those employers who have unfillable vacancies which now threatens their ability to remain functional. Huzzah!
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,989

    Nigelb said:

    Where's @GaryL ?

    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1528650438714662912
    Due to the high losses of armored vehicles during the fighting, the command of the Russian army was forced to opt for obsolete T-62 tanks from storage to staff and form reserve battalion tactical groups to be deployed to Ukraine, @GeneralStaffUA reported in its May 23 update.

    T-62 is a souped up T-55 - it was made obsolete by Chieftain & M60!

    This is like the British Army raiding Bovington and using the Centurions and Conqueror from the exhibit.
    One does eventually start to feel for the poor reserves being mobilised, if they’re being sent out to face modern weapons in such obsolete equipment. They don’t have a hope in Hell.

    The Ukranians reckon they’re about 40% through the Russian tank supply. If most of the remaining stocks are such relics, that bodes well for the defenders.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,965

    Nigelb said:

    Where's @GaryL ?

    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1528650438714662912
    Due to the high losses of armored vehicles during the fighting, the command of the Russian army was forced to opt for obsolete T-62 tanks from storage to staff and form reserve battalion tactical groups to be deployed to Ukraine, @GeneralStaffUA reported in its May 23 update.

    T-62 is a souped up T-55 - it was made obsolete by Chieftain & M60!

    This is like the British Army raiding Bovington and using the Centurions and Conqueror from the exhibit.
    It was the Soviet's primary tank in Afghanistan, where a lot were lost to RPGs.
  • Options
    dixiedean said:

    Applicant said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Some not all and they only won their seats due to Boris and Brexit, get rid of Boris now Brexit is done and they might all go
    That's not the only reason they won their seats.

    I've said this repeatedly but the Red Wall has been demographically turning Tory for years. Its housing more than Brexit or Boris that is behind the fall of the Red Wall and that remains true.

    Some Red Wall Tory MPs might remain even if the Tories lose the election and go into Opposition, some northern seats that were only narrowly won in 2010 are now safe Tory seats.

    Meanwhile thanks to the collapsing home ownership in the South due to your NIMBY policies the South is now swinging more to Labour. Quite frankly, good, the Tories losing NIMBY Councils that have blocked their own young residents from being able to get built and own a home of their own would be karmic justice. 👍
    BIB: This is, of course, literally the definition of the Red Wall - seats that demographically should have turned Tory but were for cutural and historical reasons still Labour.
    However. It is not how it is commonly used.
    There are dozens more which didn't go Tory in 2019 so could by this definition.
    In more common usage, however, there are plenty of "Red Wall" seats which are actually just marginals. They simply went Tory because they won an 80 seat majority.
    Marginals will go with the majority yes, but the Red Wall in its truest sense of the term is not the same.

    While some people object to FPTP because of "safe seats" it is worth noting that no seat is guaranteed to remain safe, and equally marginal seats can become safe. All safe seats are, are seats where the public currently has made up its mind, but they can always change it.

    To highlight three seats:

    Warrington South, Cheshire, was Labour from 1992 to 2010, regained by Labour in 2017 and regained by the Tories in 2019. Its been a marginal high up the target list for whichever party hasn't held it almost consistently. Indeed I campaigned for Mowat in this seat in 2015 and was chuffed when he was re-elected, I expected him to sadly lose the seat and the BBC exit poll (wrongly) projected he would even when it was predicting a good night for the Tories. I expect if the Tories lose the next election, this will go back to Labour again.

    South Ribble, Lancashire, was Labour 1997 to 2010 but the majority has only widened at every election since (even 2017) and now has an outright majority of votes cast for the Tories and a nearly 21% majority. Be a shock if this went back to Labour even if they won a majority now.

    Esher and Walton, Surrey, was Tory from 1997 to date and had an over 50% majority in 2015 but is now a marginal with a majority down to 4.4% and will probably be lost by the Tories at the next election whether they win or lose a majority.

    The next election could see Tories losing seats in Surrey while holding seats in the North. That may not be a bad thing for the party or the country.
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,819

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    Any polling that assumes electors will not adjust their intentions in response to such an agreement is meaningless. And I say that as someone who wants the Conservatives out.
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,155

    mwadams said:

    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    And while it is certainly true that the situation is not irrecoverable, surely "something must change" for the post-2019 trend to reverse. I don't believe that this deep into a Government, "swingback" is really a thing; we're not in the midterm blues, we're at the fin-de-siecle.
    Swingback was a thing in both 1997 and 2010 so why wouldn't it be a thing today?

    Even fin-de-siecle swingback still exists.

    If the swing is strong enough then swingback won't be sufficient to reverse the damage, that happened in 2010 and 1997, even though there was swingback the swing away had been too much for the government to survive.
    1997 was definitely a methodological problem (I think there's plenty of discussion of that). 2010 was very interesting - because while there was a substantial decrease in the Tory lead from the peaks in 2008 (roughly comparable to the time from now to the next election), the "something that changed" (to my point above) was the dramatic increase in the LD vote share from ~15% to ~23%.

    It's the "something that changes" that impacts what happens. In this case that could help either Labour or the Tories, and the "swing(back)" could be in either direction.
    Swing could be in either direction but swingback occurred both times.

    Yes there was a methodological problem in 1997 but that doesn't remove the fact that significant swingback occurred from the midterms to the election day. The swingback wasn't enough since the swing away by the midterms was so catastrophic for the Tories that the decision was already made, but there was still swingback even with the methodological issues.

    Again in 2010 there was swingback too. Yes there was an LD surge in the election campaign, but there almost always is and the polls exaggerated it. However from early 2008 to the election day there was a very real swingback to Labour and away from the Tories which was sufficient to deny the Tories an overall majority.

    In 2009 the Tories were polling a double-digit poll lead in almost every single poll, most poll leads were in the teens and there were as many 20+ as there were in the high single digits. In 2010 swingback occurred before the Lib Dem surge and the lead was narrowed to single digits long before the first debate and the rise of the Lib Dems.
    Not just during the campaign - take a look at the Lib Dem figures from 2008 - 2010 (and ignore the "in campaign filip" right at the end). The climb from a trough of ~15% in 2008 to ~20% at the start of the campaign. The campaign then does them some more good to the tune of doubling their numbers, but they are a significant contribution. Labour and the Tories *both* decline from 2008-2010 (with local minima and maxima so you can pick your date ranges to suit your argument :smile: )

    I'm not disagreeing with you - but I think I'm talking about the difference between the maths and the physics; the what and the how and the why.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    Some not all and they only won their seats due to Boris and Brexit, get rid of Boris now Brexit is done and they might all go
    That's not the only reason they won their seats.

    I've said this repeatedly but the Red Wall has been demographically turning Tory for years. Its housing more than Brexit or Boris that is behind the fall of the Red Wall and that remains true.

    Some Red Wall Tory MPs might remain even if the Tories lose the election and go into Opposition, some northern seats that were only narrowly won in 2010 are now safe Tory seats.

    Meanwhile thanks to the collapsing home ownership in the South due to your NIMBY policies the South is now swinging more to Labour. Quite frankly, good, the Tories losing NIMBY Councils that have blocked their own young residents from being able to get built and own a home of their own would be karmic justice. 👍
    Except that isn't really true. After all home ownership in 2015 or 2017 in those red wall seats was not massively different from 2019. However they stayed Labour in 2015 and 2017 only going Conservative in 2019 due to Boris and Brexit. On current polls most of the redwall seats though will go back to Labour now Brexit has been done and Corbyn gone with Boris the best hope of holding the remainder.

    The South isn't swinging to Labour at all outside London. Indeed as the local elections proved most gains in the South from the Tories were by the Liberal Democrats, Greens and Residents' Associations all opposed to excess building in the greenbelt.

    London might need more affordable homes built to reduce the swing to Labour, the South however needs fewer homes built in the countryside and greenbelt as Gove has recognised after Chesham and Amersham etc, hence he has ended zoning
    Home ownership may be part of the equation but its far from being a definite answer. My on the ground example being the Stainsby Hill ward in Thornaby-on-Tees. I know the patch very well having developed it hard to both win the majority of Thornaby council seats in 2015 and then co-authoring Paul Williams' stunning GE win in 2017.

    Stainsby - especially the Eltham Crescent end - is dirt poor. Homes are not owned, the area isn't gentrified. And in 2019 the turnout was off the scale crazy - even higher than in the referendum. And when I sampled the boxes from that area the Tory win coming out of them was sizeable.

    The problem the Tories now have is that pisshead thumbs up I love Parmos me but you're all too thick to cook videos from Matt Vickers aside absolutely nothing has happened to start improving the area or the town. That lot won't be voting for unicorns again without you delivering *something*.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,045

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    Any polling that assumes electors will not adjust their intentions in response to such an agreement is meaningless. And I say that as someone who wants the Conservatives out.
    Also an interesting issue in Scotland, given that despite Mr Sarwar's assurances, Slab are busy cooperating with Tories in local government, seemingly wherever they can. And where the sole Slab MP is heavily dependent on Tory tactical voting.
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    edited May 2022
    LDLF said:

    I'd love to see an analysis of the below points by someone in command of the numbers:

    - In which seats did the Brexit Party not stand aside in the last election?
    - How many votes did the Brexit Party receive in these seats?
    - Which way are these voters likely to go in the next election?

    If there is Tory comeback in the next election the above may play a role in it.

    P.S. I agree that Livingstone was not 'discredited' until after Johnson beat him the second time. I would pinpoint the 'Hitler was a Zionist' interview as the moment he could be categorised in the same group as Corbyn.

    I'm not an expert and someone has probably done a thorough analysis, but the headlines would be:

    (1) Mostly seats that the Tories didn't already hold - IIRC they only stood aside in seats already held by the Tories
    (2) They got a total of 644,257 votes in 275 seats - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brexit_Party_election_results#Results_by_constituency has the full list which is sortable.
    (3) The Hartlepool by-election suggests that they would predominantly lean Tory, though how well that sticks until 2024/5 is anyone's guess.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,861

    Pagan2 said:

    Applicant said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
    Apart from the EU would have refused to negotiate so even if he had wanted to Cameron could not of put a brexit on the table and said that it what you will get as when the time came who knew what the EU would agree to or not.
    The UK never used the tools available to it. State aid? Officially banned yet various other countries would do it with gay abandon and worry about a slap on the wrists once the steel works was safe. Freedom of Movement? Simply implement a national ID card and require everyone to register them with their employers. The rules allowed countries to deport freeloaders after 90 days, so we could have done as the likes of Belgium were doing.

    Incidentally, I have to talk up the government's success in the latter area. The UK workforce has shrunk by 600k since 2019/20, a triumph for all those employers who have unfillable vacancies which now threatens their ability to remain functional. Huzzah!
    Have I ever claimed we did use all the tools and even when we were in the eu the euphiles did plenty of moaning if we broke the rules. As to the uk work force shrinking well I am not going to cry if firms go bust that were using all that unlimited labour pool to pay wages you yourself have said weren't enough to live on.

    Good employers that pay well will survive. Marginal business's that could only survive my squeezing employee wages down to the bare minimum and that only because taxpayers were providing top ups to the employees I really can't be moved to shed a tear for. Tough luck on them. The employees of those companies will soon find new opportunities given the employment market and probably with better pay and conditions.

    Seems to me the employees are gaining wealth and the employers that are silas marners are going to find themselves going out of business
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,036
    Biden abandoning "strategic ambiguity" is a huge move.
    Total shift in US policy. Though they claim it isn't. It is
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403
    Applicant said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    Swingback comes from where it always comes from - the opposition, having spent several years merely criticising the government (which is always easy and usually popular) get to an election campaign and have to put themselves forward as an alternative government with some actual policies. This invariably turns off a number of people - whether that number if larger or smaller then becomes the key factor.
    For all of the (justified) criticism of Starmer not offering much in the way of policies yet, I think he's doing enough. Wedge issues like the Windfall Tax make the Tories look like bosses vs the plebs to show up how out of touch with Your Life they are, and then when they u-turn and implement a Windfall Tax Starmer jujst points and says - "we stand up for you against that lot".

    Blair won a massive landslide due to the massive tactical ABC vote but Smith would also have won on a smaller scale because the Tories had broken themselves that badly in 92.
  • Options
    GaryLGaryL Posts: 131
    Ll
  • Options
    mwadams said:

    mwadams said:

    mwadams said:

    HYUFD said:

    It was thanks to Johnson's landslide election win in 2019 the Conservatives have their biggest majority since 1987 and those red wall MPs won their seats anyway. Winning after 10 years of your party in power is always a challenge, hence only Major has managed it in the last 100 years but Johnson is still probably the Tories best bet of doing so.

    Currently they are polling 33 to 35% so the situation is not yet irrecoverable

    But it is those Red Wall seat MPs who are facing losing their jobs.
    And while it is certainly true that the situation is not irrecoverable, surely "something must change" for the post-2019 trend to reverse. I don't believe that this deep into a Government, "swingback" is really a thing; we're not in the midterm blues, we're at the fin-de-siecle.
    Swingback was a thing in both 1997 and 2010 so why wouldn't it be a thing today?

    Even fin-de-siecle swingback still exists.

    If the swing is strong enough then swingback won't be sufficient to reverse the damage, that happened in 2010 and 1997, even though there was swingback the swing away had been too much for the government to survive.
    1997 was definitely a methodological problem (I think there's plenty of discussion of that). 2010 was very interesting - because while there was a substantial decrease in the Tory lead from the peaks in 2008 (roughly comparable to the time from now to the next election), the "something that changed" (to my point above) was the dramatic increase in the LD vote share from ~15% to ~23%.

    It's the "something that changes" that impacts what happens. In this case that could help either Labour or the Tories, and the "swing(back)" could be in either direction.
    Swing could be in either direction but swingback occurred both times.

    Yes there was a methodological problem in 1997 but that doesn't remove the fact that significant swingback occurred from the midterms to the election day. The swingback wasn't enough since the swing away by the midterms was so catastrophic for the Tories that the decision was already made, but there was still swingback even with the methodological issues.

    Again in 2010 there was swingback too. Yes there was an LD surge in the election campaign, but there almost always is and the polls exaggerated it. However from early 2008 to the election day there was a very real swingback to Labour and away from the Tories which was sufficient to deny the Tories an overall majority.

    In 2009 the Tories were polling a double-digit poll lead in almost every single poll, most poll leads were in the teens and there were as many 20+ as there were in the high single digits. In 2010 swingback occurred before the Lib Dem surge and the lead was narrowed to single digits long before the first debate and the rise of the Lib Dems.
    Not just during the campaign - take a look at the Lib Dem figures from 2008 - 2010 (and ignore the "in campaign filip" right at the end). The climb from a trough of ~15% in 2008 to ~20% at the start of the campaign. The campaign then does them some more good to the tune of doubling their numbers, but they are a significant contribution. Labour and the Tories *both* decline from 2008-2010 (with local minima and maxima so you can pick your date ranges to suit your argument :smile: )

    I'm not disagreeing with you - but I think I'm talking about the difference between the maths and the physics; the what and the how and the why.
    The Lib Dem averages are remarkably flat in the pre-campaign period.

    It is swingback to Labour that is far more significant.

    image
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,428
    Minister urges people to be 'sensible' over pay (And no it is not a conservative minister)

    Wage negotiations 'have to be sensible' - Richard Lochhead, Scotland's employment minister has urged people to be "sensible" when asking for pay rises.

    Richard Lochhead acknowledged that many people were facing "huge pressure" as inflation hits 9%, a 40-year high. But he said the country was in a "precarious position" and workers should ask for "affordable" wage increases.

    Both Aslef and the RMT have rejected a 2.2% offer from the recently nationalised train operator ScotRail.

    This has raised the prospect of possible strike action on the railways, adding to the disruption caused by driver shortages.

    More than 300 services were cancelled on Sunday, and a drastically reduced temporary timetable is to come into effect on Monday as many drivers refuse to work overtime.

    The Scottish government has said a train driver in Scotland typically earns more than £50,000 a year, and has urged the rail unions to negotiate with ScotRail.

    Asked on the BBC's The Sunday Show if the unions were making reasonable demands, he said: "My message to all workers in Scotland, in all these sectors, is that we have to sensible.

    "Everything has to be affordable because the country is in a very precarious position at the moment and if we take wrong decisions we could end up with a recession."
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,254
    Lib Dems have tabled a "humble address" to force the release of the minutes of the PM- Sue Gray meeting and any correspondence during the course of the inquiry
    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1528667956498116608
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,697

    Pagan2 said:

    Applicant said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
    Apart from the EU would have refused to negotiate so even if he had wanted to Cameron could not of put a brexit on the table and said that it what you will get as when the time came who knew what the EU would agree to or not.
    The UK never used the tools available to it. State aid? Officially banned yet various other countries would do it with gay abandon and worry about a slap on the wrists once the steel works was safe. Freedom of Movement? Simply implement a national ID card and require everyone to register them with their employers. The rules allowed countries to deport freeloaders after 90 days, so we could have done as the likes of Belgium were doing.

    Incidentally, I have to talk up the government's success in the latter area. The UK workforce has shrunk by 600k since 2019/20, a triumph for all those employers who have unfillable vacancies which now threatens their ability to remain functional. Huzzah!
    I always said that we needed a French attitude to EU regulation. Simple test - if the regulation isn't considered to be In The National Interest (as defined by the politicians)....

    "And thirdly, the code is more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules"

    As to FoM - as @rcs1000 keeps pointing out, look at what the Swiss have done.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    Look at the opinion polls. Swingback will come from those Tory 2019 voters who currently tell pollsters they don't know who they will vote for.

    If they've not made the leap to say that they'll vote Labour or Lib Dems during mid-term then it's because they're looking for an excuse to vote Tory to stop Labour. They will be provided with ample such reasons during an election campaign.
    I expect an awful lot of those voters to abstain.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,513

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    Any polling that assumes electors will not adjust their intentions in response to such an agreement is meaningless. And I say that as someone who wants the Conservatives out.
    The question asked to the poll respondents includes the fact of the pact. It doesn't simply aggregate Labour/Lib Dems/Green voting intention in each seat.

    It doesn't factor in how a pact might survive criticism during an election campaign, etc, but I can't pick too many holes in the methodology, though I'd like to find something to hang my instinctive disbelief onto.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,965
    dixiedean said:

    Biden abandoning "strategic ambiguity" is a huge move.
    Total shift in US policy. Though they claim it isn't. It is

    Yes, it is.
    They've left a sliver of doubt, should China wish to save face rather than take it as a 'provocation' (an term which, as with Russia/Ukraine, is the excuse of a dictator), but I think the US has realised the economic and strategic importance of Taiwan, and has decided to draw a line.

    It's not without risks, but so is the alternate policy of doing nothing - arguably more so.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,065

    Applicant said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    Swingback comes from where it always comes from - the opposition, having spent several years merely criticising the government (which is always easy and usually popular) get to an election campaign and have to put themselves forward as an alternative government with some actual policies. This invariably turns off a number of people - whether that number if larger or smaller then becomes the key factor.
    For all of the (justified) criticism of Starmer not offering much in the way of policies yet, I think he's doing enough. .
    His range of action is fairly limited when it comes to policies because if they become too popular Johnson will nick them and if it costs any money the tories will say we can't afford it. (But can afford a national flegship, etc)

    Legalising cannabis would be a good policy for Labour because it'd be young voter turnout machine, doesn't cost anything and Johnson couldn't co-opt it as he couldn't take the gammon wing of the MPs with him on it.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,254
    Dura_Ace said:

    Legalising cannabis would be a good policy for Labour because it'd be young voter turnout machine, doesn't cost anything and Johnson couldn't co-opt it as he couldn't take the gammon wing of the MPs with him on it.

    legalise coke on the other hand...
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Applicant said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
    Apart from the EU would have refused to negotiate so even if he had wanted to Cameron could not of put a brexit on the table and said that it what you will get as when the time came who knew what the EU would agree to or not.
    The UK never used the tools available to it. State aid? Officially banned yet various other countries would do it with gay abandon and worry about a slap on the wrists once the steel works was safe. Freedom of Movement? Simply implement a national ID card and require everyone to register them with their employers. The rules allowed countries to deport freeloaders after 90 days, so we could have done as the likes of Belgium were doing.

    Incidentally, I have to talk up the government's success in the latter area. The UK workforce has shrunk by 600k since 2019/20, a triumph for all those employers who have unfillable vacancies which now threatens their ability to remain functional. Huzzah!
    Have I ever claimed we did use all the tools and even when we were in the eu the euphiles did plenty of moaning if we broke the rules. As to the uk work force shrinking well I am not going to cry if firms go bust that were using all that unlimited labour pool to pay wages you yourself have said weren't enough to live on.

    Good employers that pay well will survive. Marginal business's that could only survive my squeezing employee wages down to the bare minimum and that only because taxpayers were providing top ups to the employees I really can't be moved to shed a tear for. Tough luck on them. The employees of those companies will soon find new opportunities given the employment market and probably with better pay and conditions.

    Seems to me the employees are gaining wealth and the employers that are silas marners are going to find themselves going out of business
    I don't have much sympathy for non-viable businesses where only by paying slave wages can they function. But I'm not concerned about them - its all the sectors where they can't get labour at any price that are in trouble. Hospitality being a prime example. Locals don't want to work in the sector despite very healthy wages and besides there is local high levels of employment.

    I've debated this with BR before who said people in Widnes should just uproot to take factory jobs in Wisbech. Amazingly enough there aren't any takers for such things. Which is why we both have large pockets of unemployment and underemployment and pockets of industries in deep shit because of a lack of workers.
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    Applicant said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    Swingback comes from where it always comes from - the opposition, having spent several years merely criticising the government (which is always easy and usually popular) get to an election campaign and have to put themselves forward as an alternative government with some actual policies. This invariably turns off a number of people - whether that number if larger or smaller then becomes the key factor.
    For all of the (justified) criticism of Starmer not offering much in the way of policies yet, I think he's doing enough. Wedge issues like the Windfall Tax make the Tories look like bosses vs the plebs to show up how out of touch with Your Life they are, and then when they u-turn and implement a Windfall Tax Starmer jujst points and says - "we stand up for you against that lot".

    Blair won a massive landslide due to the massive tactical ABC vote but Smith would also have won on a smaller scale because the Tories had broken themselves that badly in 92.
    The fact that the one policy that SKS has is a completely fucking terrible idea (as a policy rather than as party politics) really doesn't bode well.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,428

    GaryL said:

    Ll

    Pretending you’re Welsh won’t help.
    We wouldn't have him

    The Welsh stand for Ukraine and the end to the monstrous war criminal that is Putin
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,403
    Applicant said:

    Applicant said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    Top political commentator Gary Neville:-

    A PM that doesn’t know who paid for his wallpaper, a PM that doesn’t know who called a meeting with Sue Gray, a PM that can’t recall the detail of his meets with a Russian Peer, a PM that doesn’t know if a party is going on in his own house. Cover up merchant!
    https://twitter.com/GNev2/status/1528305853983600641

    Gary Neville doesn't like the Tory Prime Minister?

    If Boris loses other top political commentators like Gary Linekar then how can he survive? 😱
    Who do you suppose "the public" (or a greater proportion of it) knows better - Garys Neville and Lineker or Dan Hodges?
    No question, Neville and Linekar.

    But luvvies or celebrities holding strong political opinions is nothing new and is baked in already.

    Neville being against a Tory is about as newsworthy as Morrissey being against the establishment, or a steak.
    So hoorah, more Tory governments who increase NI in preference to income tax to retain the elderly (and incidentally nimby) vote, you must be pleased
    Not at all.

    Not to do a HYUFD but the red lights are flashing that the Tories will lose the next election if they are unable to win back erstwhile Tory voters, of which there are numerous on this site including not just myself.

    That doesn't include people like Neville. Neville being against the Tories is as shocking as Corbyn being against them. Nothing he has ever said has ever given the impression that he is a swing voter.
    GNev is a Labour member now, so you're right that his political outrage is hardly a surprise.

    But look at who he is, who he reaches, and what he is saying. There is harsh reality that the economic condition millions are enduring is increasingly harsh and we haven't even got into the bad stuff yet. GNev is saying what people are experiencing, and the Tories are still either saying "what crisis, here's all we've done for you workshy plebs" or saying "poor people are lazy and stupid, its their own fault".

    Either way I can't see where the Swingback comes from once the connection to anything other than their core vote has snapped. We will see next month - when both seats are lost perhaps they will start getting the message that Boris is a shit Marlon Brando and this is Apocalpyse Now.
    Swingback comes from where it always comes from - the opposition, having spent several years merely criticising the government (which is always easy and usually popular) get to an election campaign and have to put themselves forward as an alternative government with some actual policies. This invariably turns off a number of people - whether that number if larger or smaller then becomes the key factor.
    For all of the (justified) criticism of Starmer not offering much in the way of policies yet, I think he's doing enough. Wedge issues like the Windfall Tax make the Tories look like bosses vs the plebs to show up how out of touch with Your Life they are, and then when they u-turn and implement a Windfall Tax Starmer jujst points and says - "we stand up for you against that lot".

    Blair won a massive landslide due to the massive tactical ABC vote but Smith would also have won on a smaller scale because the Tories had broken themselves that badly in 92.
    The fact that the one policy that SKS has is a completely fucking terrible idea (as a policy rather than as party politics) really doesn't bode well.
    Was it a completely fucking terrible idea when the Thatcher government did it over a period of years? Didn't Ed Balls rip the "its ideologically unconservative" argument apart by pointing to its creation and implimentation under Thatcher by Lawson?
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,131
    I see from @GaryL on the previous thread that we don’t have the power “to force Russia to withdraw” but we can abandon Ukraine to their fate.

    So, @GaryL, if Russian victory is inevitable why are they making such heavy going of it?
  • Options
    ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    Any polling that assumes electors will not adjust their intentions in response to such an agreement is meaningless. And I say that as someone who wants the Conservatives out.
    The question asked to the poll respondents includes the fact of the pact. It doesn't simply aggregate Labour/Lib Dems/Green voting intention in each seat.

    It doesn't factor in how a pact might survive criticism during an election campaign, etc, but I can't pick too many holes in the methodology, though I'd like to find something to hang my instinctive disbelief onto.
    For a start, a fair few people, being less interested in the day-to-day of politics than us obsessives, will turn up at the voting booth and find waiting a ballot paper with no "there has been a pact" rubric, just missing their preferred party.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,861
    edited May 2022

    Our new MRP poll today for @Con_Soc shows that if #Labour, #LibDems and #Greens could agree to co-operate, this would be the result at a general election. Details at: electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_const…

    https://twitter.com/ElectCalculus/status/1528649594392961025

    Labour majority of 136

    Any polling that assumes electors will not adjust their intentions in response to such an agreement is meaningless. And I say that as someone who wants the Conservatives out.
    The question asked to the poll respondents includes the fact of the pact. It doesn't simply aggregate Labour/Lib Dems/Green voting intention in each seat.

    It doesn't factor in how a pact might survive criticism during an election campaign, etc, but I can't pick too many holes in the methodology, though I'd like to find something to hang my instinctive disbelief onto.
    Even if the methodology is sound I am sorry the responders are simply lying. The poll claims 17 seats for the greens that alone should tell you that the responders aren't responding truthfully as to what they would really do.

    The 17th best seat for the greens in 2019 was with they came 4th with 6.3% . I don't see enough holding their nose and voting green on the day to turn that into a win. I suspect its more likely I will change sex, become a nun and prance about the alps yodelling about lonely goatherds and whiskers on kittens while accompanied by a passel of austrian snot nosed crotch goblins than the greens would manage anywhere like 17 seats and I don't see the latter happening in this universe.
  • Options
    BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 18,822
    edited May 2022

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Applicant said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It goes back to David Cameron who should have nailed down Brexit before calling the referendum.

    How, exactly?

    He told the public what would happen.

    They cried "Project fear"
    He could have done a Thatcher and negotiated an amended deal. She got a rebate, he could have got an end to freedom of movement
    He tried, officially at least.

    But that's not the point John was making - the terms of Brexit should have been negotiated before the referendum(*) so that people knew what they were voting on. The reason they weren't, of course, is that Cameron was trying to win a referendum to stay in the EU and knew he'd need to use Project Fear to do so. Nearly worked, too.

    (*) Or, at the very least, EEA/EFTA should have been on the ballot paper.
    Apart from the EU would have refused to negotiate so even if he had wanted to Cameron could not of put a brexit on the table and said that it what you will get as when the time came who knew what the EU would agree to or not.
    The UK never used the tools available to it. State aid? Officially banned yet various other countries would do it with gay abandon and worry about a slap on the wrists once the steel works was safe. Freedom of Movement? Simply implement a national ID card and require everyone to register them with their employers. The rules allowed countries to deport freeloaders after 90 days, so we could have done as the likes of Belgium were doing.

    Incidentally, I have to talk up the government's success in the latter area. The UK workforce has shrunk by 600k since 2019/20, a triumph for all those employers who have unfillable vacancies which now threatens their ability to remain functional. Huzzah!
    Have I ever claimed we did use all the tools and even when we were in the eu the euphiles did plenty of moaning if we broke the rules. As to the uk work force shrinking well I am not going to cry if firms go bust that were using all that unlimited labour pool to pay wages you yourself have said weren't enough to live on.

    Good employers that pay well will survive. Marginal business's that could only survive my squeezing employee wages down to the bare minimum and that only because taxpayers were providing top ups to the employees I really can't be moved to shed a tear for. Tough luck on them. The employees of those companies will soon find new opportunities given the employment market and probably with better pay and conditions.

    Seems to me the employees are gaining wealth and the employers that are silas marners are going to find themselves going out of business
    I don't have much sympathy for non-viable businesses where only by paying slave wages can they function. But I'm not concerned about them - its all the sectors where they can't get labour at any price that are in trouble. Hospitality being a prime example. Locals don't want to work in the sector despite very healthy wages and besides there is local high levels of employment.

    I've debated this with BR before who said people in Widnes should just uproot to take factory jobs in Wisbech. Amazingly enough there aren't any takers for such things. Which is why we both have large pockets of unemployment and underemployment and pockets of industries in deep shit because of a lack of workers.
    I never said people in Widnes should take factory jobs in Wisbech, though there's nothing wrong with an on your bike attitude.

    But if there's availability for workers in Widnes, but not Wisbech, then maybe the factory should be located in Widnes instead? Maybe that should encourage investment in Widnes instead?

    We could possibly call that 'levelling up'.

    If there's no workers available in Wisbech for the factory, perhaps the factory should close down. Or if the factory doesn't want to close down, it can pay attractive wages that attract workers. That's free market economics working.
This discussion has been closed.