Sarah Montague praising Suella Braverman's emotional seat.
Listening to Suella (and JRM) it's a shame neither ever got into government. Maybe if Suella had been given one of the high offices of state the Conservatives might have won.
The Scottish Government has snuck out its response to the Cass Review on the day the governing party has been reduced to just nine seats and on the busiest political news day of the year.
Many people just don't care about politics. They're not irate/angry/disillusioned, they just don't give a shit.
If you don't care, and don't vote, you don't get a say. That's their choice.
BUT I think there is an incentive for political parties to keep an eye on those non-voters. Those mad lefty Millennials are coming into prime turnout age, and that is the big opportunity for Labour.
Eventually the incels (male) and environmentacrazies (female) in their late teens/early 20s will turn up to the polling place too.
What this means IMHO, is that the talk of a Tory civil war is overblown. The remaining MPs are likely to be less ideological and will mainly be looking for a safe pair of hands. I would put my money on Barclay.
It also wouldn't surprise me if we get 1-2 defections to Reform (perhaps Suella)
Excellent speech I thought. First time I've been convinced by Starmer as PM material.
Starmer strikes exactly the right tone. But the question will be how big is the gap between him and the labour party MP's. How many of the latter will be happy with this 'boring' approach?
Whatever dark arts he used to silence momentum will probably work again on this.
He also has a huge amount of "Knights of the Shires" like Alistair Strathern in Hitchin. The parliamentary party is now far less left wing.
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
Interesting stats. The one that would be interesting is the swing required next time for Lab to lose its majority. Doesn't feel like it would be that high.
Eye balling the third diagram in the header, the benchmark would be seats less than 7000 majority would have to switch to lose overall majority . I'm not sure what 7000 is in swing terms but it's reasonably high. It depends massively on what happens with other parties, in particular Reform.
The Conservatives are a lot more vulnerable the other way. They were lucky to avoid an even more cataclysmic result.
About seven percent. But that still leaves the Conservatives a long way from power with this many Lib Dems.
I feel for Sunak. Decent high calibre chap, chewed up by party politics. He didn't have much of a chance but he wasn't PM material. Too nice, much too timid and meek. A back-room geek sort not a leader.
The Cons must come together and select a strong leader; May, Johnson and Sunak were not that.
I know we all knew this was coming, but it’s still remarkable to see how deep into very, very safe Conservative seats Labour (and Lib Dems and Reform) made gains.
Plotted here against Blair’s 1997 landslide for scale.
Just an extraordinarily motivated anti-Tory vote 🔴🌊
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
Yes you made a very early call that SKS was going to come good and you maintained it in the face of much ridicule. Well done.
The Scottish Government has snuck out its response to the Cass Review on the day the governing party has been reduced to just nine seats and on the busiest political news day of the year.
“If I were you I’d reverse what I did to win this massive majority”
If I were you, I’d focus now on a massive charm offensive to win back the left wing and minority voters you abused and insulted, believing we were irrelevant and had nowhere to go.
Starmer won by being Not The Tories; essentially by being quiet. You can see why it's not to Owen's liking
Starmer bought into the false narrative it was social care policy that did for Theresa May in 2017, which is why the Labour campaign was a policy-free zone.
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
Ed Davey has had a brilliant campaign. Most successful Lib Dem leader ever?
A sensational campaign. How do we get attention for both ourselves and for our policies? Find a way to highlight them in a way that the media can't ignore. But don't do it once or twice. Do it again and again and again until the campaign itself is a story.
The zenith? The bungee jump. "Take the Leap" was the challenge. "Do something you've never done before".
And here it is. Our biggest win in a century. 71 seats, likely 72 seats tomorrow. Never mind the people saying we'd lose the by-election wins. Some of last night's wins were by-election swings. Extraordinary wins. A party machine which had a brilliant strategy and targeting, and was flexible enough to know when we had target seats in the bag to move to the next tranche. And then the tranche beyond that.
We lost a few which annoy - Hunt's seat a prime example. But hard to be upset with that haul. Or the way we set about it. I remain buzzing and grinning and all of that to have been part of it.
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
To play the game a little - I don't think you did, but a poster with a similar name certainly did.
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
Yes you made a very early call that SKS was going to come good and you maintained it in the face of much ridicule. Well done.
I always said SKS was Tories worst nightmare. Wonder where we would be now if Long-Bailey had won?
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
WHITHER PR?!
Well both really!
But well-spotted - I blame tiredness / autocorrect / emotional overload!
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
Yes you made a very early call that SKS was going to come good and you maintained it in the face of much ridicule. Well done.
I always said SKS was Tories worst nightmare. Wonder where we would be now if Long-Bailey had won?
Sarah Montague is really upset. Someone should take the poor girl off air and give her a rest. She is furious with Oliver Lewis of Reform for stealing the election from the Conservatives
What this means IMHO, is that the talk of a Tory civil war is overblown. The remaining MPs are likely to be less ideological and will mainly be looking for a safe pair of hands. I would put my money on Barclay.
It also wouldn't surprise me if we get 1-2 defections to Reform (perhaps Suella)
But can "safe pair of hands" beat SKS? I would consider voting for a party led by a pragmatist assuming Labour cock it up but that seems like wishful thinking unless they think he'll do a Boris?
Depends on how he does. The first job of the new Con leader has to be to not cock it up any further and then aim to get them back over 200 seats
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
We bloody well do need PR. This is the stupidest election possible. Labour have won a LANDSLIDE with LESS THAN 34% of the vote. Reform got 14.3% of the vote and 4 seats. We got 12.2% of the vote and 71 seats - which btw is 9 short of proportionality.
The Scottish Government has snuck out its response to the Cass Review on the day the governing party has been reduced to just nine seats and on the busiest political news day of the year.
Interesting stats. The one that would be interesting is the swing required next time for Lab to lose its majority. Doesn't feel like it would be that high.
Eye balling the third diagram in the header, the benchmark would be seats less than 7000 majority would have to switch to lose overall majority . I'm not sure what 7000 is in swing terms but it's reasonably high. It depends massively on what happens with other parties, in particular Reform.
The Conservatives are a lot more vulnerable the other way. They were lucky to avoid an even more cataclysmic result.
About seven percent. But that still leaves the Conservatives a long way from power with this many Lib Dems.
Yes. Even if Labour lose their majority next time Lib Dems going into coalition with them seems more plausible than with a Reform targeting Conservative Party
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
To be honest, I think that the most important thing there is that there's now a vocal constituency on the right who want PR.
Because of Reform and their obviously unfair results, it's no longer seen as only an elite drawing-room obsession, or just a self-interested , only lefty one.
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
We bloody well do need PR. This is the stupidest election possible. Labour have won a LANDSLIDE with LESS THAN 34% of the vote. Reform got 14.3% of the vote and 4 seats. We got 12.2% of the vote and 71 seats - which btw is 9 short of proportionality.
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
If the LDs didn't continue to push for it, I'd never vote for them again!
Less than 34% of the vote, and the Labour party have won a massive majority. How very very bizarre.
Labour's support is a mile wide and an inch deep, and we've now proved that you can gain less than 2% vote share and over 200 seats.
It also means the reverse can happen. 5 years from now the whole thing could switch and the Conservatives could take 200 back and form a government.
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
To play the game a little - I don't think you did, but a poster with a similar name certainly did.
Interesting stats. The one that would be interesting is the swing required next time for Lab to lose its majority. Doesn't feel like it would be that high.
Eye balling the third diagram in the header, the benchmark would be seats less than 7000 majority would have to switch to lose overall majority . I'm not sure what 7000 is in swing terms but it's reasonably high. It depends massively on what happens with other parties, in particular Reform.
The Conservatives are a lot more vulnerable the other way. They were lucky to avoid an even more cataclysmic result.
About seven percent. But that still leaves the Conservatives a long way from power with this many Lib Dems.
Assuming that those new Lib Dem MPs manage to dig in and get the usual big first time incumbency bonus, we should probably be thinking of an increased likelihood of NOM at the next election.
Reform vote percentage 14 -15.99% band (10 bf) Turnout 57.50 - 59.99% band (8.3 bf) Con seats 100-149 band (4.0 bf) Tewkesbury LD (20/1 Bet365) Honiton & Sidmouth LD (5/2 Bet365) Ashfield Reform (13/5 Bet365) A chunky bet on Con to lose over 200 seats (1.83 bf)
All winners.
Narrow 43/1 loser!:
Labour vote percentage 34.00 - 35.99%
Very good election for my bets. Would have been even better if it were not for Magic Grandpa.
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
Yes you made a very early call that SKS was going to come good and you maintained it in the face of much ridicule. Well done.
I always said SKS was Tories worst nightmare. Wonder where we would be now if Long-Bailey had won?
In a hole.
Boris Johnson did two things, he saved us from Jeremy Corbyn (I know I supported him) and Laura Pidcock.
Edward Leigh, Father of the House by dint of being ahead of Corbyn in the 1983 parliamentary arrival queue.
Other than Mason the BBC presenters on R4 seem unbelievably glum.
Sarah Montague focusing on Ashworth, Streeting and Phillip's performances. I'm sad for her, she's very upset.
That's like Clarke vs Skinner back in the day.
I thought Jess Phillips won?
Radio 4's current affairs presenters are embarrassing with the odd notable exception. Yesterday Emma Barnett was griping about being caught speeding in a 20mph zone and foliage obscuring signs, she's in London, every road is 20mph. Also the return of "Thought for the day", FFS.
Ed Davey has had a brilliant campaign. Most successful Lib Dem leader ever?
A sensational campaign. How do we get attention for both ourselves and for our policies? Find a way to highlight them in a way that the media can't ignore. But don't do it once or twice. Do it again and again and again until the campaign itself is a story.
The zenith? The bungee jump. "Take the Leap" was the challenge. "Do something you've never done before".
And here it is. Our biggest win in a century. 71 seats, likely 72 seats tomorrow. Never mind the people saying we'd lose the by-election wins. Some of last night's wins were by-election swings. Extraordinary wins. A party machine which had a brilliant strategy and targeting, and was flexible enough to know when we had target seats in the bag to move to the next tranche. And then the tranche beyond that.
We lost a few which annoy - Hunt's seat a prime example. But hard to be upset with that haul. Or the way we set about it. I remain buzzing and grinning and all of that to have been part of it.
Godalming and Ash was probably won by Hunt when the water supply was restored to Bramley on Wednesday night...
Ed Davey has had a brilliant campaign. Most successful Lib Dem leader ever?
A sensational campaign. How do we get attention for both ourselves and for our policies? Find a way to highlight them in a way that the media can't ignore. But don't do it once or twice. Do it again and again and again until the campaign itself is a story.
The zenith? The bungee jump. "Take the Leap" was the challenge. "Do something you've never done before".
And here it is. Our biggest win in a century. 71 seats, likely 72 seats tomorrow. Never mind the people saying we'd lose the by-election wins. Some of last night's wins were by-election swings. Extraordinary wins. A party machine which had a brilliant strategy and targeting, and was flexible enough to know when we had target seats in the bag to move to the next tranche. And then the tranche beyond that.
We lost a few which annoy - Hunt's seat a prime example. But hard to be upset with that haul. Or the way we set about it. I remain buzzing and grinning and all of that to have been part of it.
I think East Hants has got to be on your target list. It's now a marginal having once been I think the second safest Tory seat in the country. I felt a swell there and I was nearly proven right.
I note the Inverness seat has gone to a recount tomorrow. Any PBer with a handle on this one?
Talk is that LibDems may have edged it.
I'd heard the Lib Dem is actually reasonably comfortably ahead (well, it's a marginal but not wafer thin by any means). However there is a discrepancy of 1000 between votes apparently issued and cast. Probably a tabulation/transcription issue of some kind, but a faff to resolve.
There is a weird world where if Labour go up in voteshare at all next time around, do they win a swathe of new seats?
Yes. On yesterday's results it would push the Conservatives into the third party behind the Lib Dems. The much derided Survation MRP model was out by a only a small vote share difference. Almost MoE.
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
If the LDs didn't continue to push for it, I'd never vote for them again!
Less than 34% of the vote, and the Labour party have won a massive majority. How very very bizarre.
Labour's support is a mile wide and an inch deep, and we've now proved that you can gain less than 2% vote share and over 200 seats.
It also means the reverse can happen. 5 years from now the whole thing could switch and the Conservatives could take 200 back and form a government.
Fair point re the LDs - I am sure they'll stick with it.
I really think Starmer should move towards PR, a) because it's the right thing to do and b) because more cynically, it would block the Tory membership from ever again dictating how the country is run.
I doubt it will happen sadly, and struggle to see what the route would be even if Starmer saw things as I do.
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
I think this misreads the LD position in two ways. Firstly, even if the party did relatively well under FPTP this time, that's no guarantee of not getting shafted by it next time, as may easily happen for any party in this region of the vote-share %; and it's not even like it way over performed vs proportionality. Secondly, I think a lot of LDs are strongly tied to PR on principle, not merely as a tactical gain. (I would compare this to Tories on FPTP -- obviously they do very well on FPTP most of the time, but I also think many have genuine principled and small c conservative reasons to prefer FPTP and would not abandon it just because it looked like they'd do better in a different system for once.)
Ed Davey has had a brilliant campaign. Most successful Lib Dem leader ever?
A sensational campaign. How do we get attention for both ourselves and for our policies? Find a way to highlight them in a way that the media can't ignore. But don't do it once or twice. Do it again and again and again until the campaign itself is a story.
The zenith? The bungee jump. "Take the Leap" was the challenge. "Do something you've never done before".
And here it is. Our biggest win in a century. 71 seats, likely 72 seats tomorrow. Never mind the people saying we'd lose the by-election wins. Some of last night's wins were by-election swings. Extraordinary wins. A party machine which had a brilliant strategy and targeting, and was flexible enough to know when we had target seats in the bag to move to the next tranche. And then the tranche beyond that.
We lost a few which annoy - Hunt's seat a prime example. But hard to be upset with that haul. Or the way we set about it. I remain buzzing and grinning and all of that to have been part of it.
I think East Hants has got to be on your target list. It's now a marginal having once been I think the second safest Tory seat in the country. I felt a swell there and I was nearly proven right.
North Dorset too! Only 1589 votes behind the Tories.
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
I think this misreads the LD position in two ways. Firstly, even if the party did relatively well under FPTP this time, that's no guarantee of not getting shafted by it next time, as may easily happen for any party in this region of the vote-share %; and it's not even like it way over performed vs proportionality. Secondly, I think a lot of LDs are strongly tied to PR on principle, not merely as a tactical gain. (I would compare this to Tories on FPTP -- obviously they do very well on FPTP most of the time, but I also think many have genuine principled and small c conservative reasons to prefer FPTP and would not abandon it just because it looked like they'd do better in a different system for once.)
Yes, yes, all fair. My post was slightly tongue-in-cheek.
Ed Davey has had a brilliant campaign. Most successful Lib Dem leader ever?
A sensational campaign. How do we get attention for both ourselves and for our policies? Find a way to highlight them in a way that the media can't ignore. But don't do it once or twice. Do it again and again and again until the campaign itself is a story.
The zenith? The bungee jump. "Take the Leap" was the challenge. "Do something you've never done before".
And here it is. Our biggest win in a century. 71 seats, likely 72 seats tomorrow. Never mind the people saying we'd lose the by-election wins. Some of last night's wins were by-election swings. Extraordinary wins. A party machine which had a brilliant strategy and targeting, and was flexible enough to know when we had target seats in the bag to move to the next tranche. And then the tranche beyond that.
We lost a few which annoy - Hunt's seat a prime example. But hard to be upset with that haul. Or the way we set about it. I remain buzzing and grinning and all of that to have been part of it.
LibDems fought a hundred local campaigns, by-elections if you like. Reform fought a national campaign. LibDems got 3.5 million votes and 71 seats. Reform got 4 million votes and 4 seats. LibDems exploited FPTP to get an almost proportional result. Reform were screwed by the system.
After my disastrous performance backing one Jeremy Corbyn, today I will be triumphant, if I may.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
Yes you made a very early call that SKS was going to come good and you maintained it in the face of much ridicule. Well done.
Those posters who humiliated Starmer with nicknames like Gordon Brittas, whilst adoring Boris Johnson are quiet today. I'm not particularly a fan, but he needs to get the job done now.
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
Edward Leigh, Father of the House by dint of being ahead of Corbyn in the 1983 parliamentary arrival queue.
Other than Mason the BBC presenters on R4 seem unbelievably glum.
Sarah Montague focusing on Ashworth, Streeting and Phillip's performances. I'm sad for her, she's very upset.
That's like Clarke vs Skinner back in the day.
I thought Jess Phillips won?
Radio 4's current affairs presenters are embarrassing with the odd notable exception. Yesterday Emma Barnett was griping about being caught speeding in a 20mph zone and foliage obscuring signs, she's in London, every road is 20mph. Also the return of "Thought for the day", FFS.
That’s a presumption that she was in London when she was caught breaking a 20mph limit.
"We predicted a landslide", seems like they predicted that on the basis not of Labour's vote efficiency but because of putting Labour way too high and using UNS.
There is a weird world where if Labour go up in voteshare at all next time around, do they win a swathe of new seats?
There's probably also a weird world where Labours voteshare goes up and they loose seats....
Some interesting betting opportunities next time, I think.
Almost certainly but we will all pass a lot of water before then. Who in Dec 2019 foresaw Covid, Ukraine, Truss etc? we don't know what will be the big events for Starmer.
Big question for the SNP after last night is this;
How do you deliver in government in 18 months when Labour are clear there will be no more money quickly and you claim you need billions to fix the problems you've been unable to for 17 years?
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
Jacob wants Farage or Johnson as Con leader. He explains that Labour had just 35% of the vote whereas Ref-Con made 39%.
It would be wise for JRM to have a period of silence to think and reflect on what the voters of north east Somerset have said, after kicking him out on his arse...
There is a weird world where if Labour go up in voteshare at all next time around, do they win a swathe of new seats?
There's probably also a weird world where Labours voteshare goes up and they loose seats....
Some interesting betting opportunities next time, I think.
Almost certainly but we will all pass a lot of water before then. Who in Dec 2019 foresaw Covid, Ukraine, Truss etc? we don't know what will be the big events for Starmer.
A lot will happen between now and then I am sure.
But people are far too confident in predicting a Labour downfall, I remain sceptical just now.
Jacob wants Farage or Johnson as Con leader. He explains that Labour had just 35% of the vote whereas Ref-Con made 39%.
It would be wise for JRM to have a period of silence to think and reflect on what the voters of north east Somerset have said, after kicking him out on his arse...
I see we're back to adding the Reform score to the Tories.
When will these morons understand that you can't do that.
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
I asked during the night but if the Gaza Indys got together into a parliamentary group, do they get Short money or is that only based on the election night results?
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
Excellent. Having a million quid a year extra, the Lib Dems could pay back the Michael Brown fraud victims entirely over the next parliament.
SNP are going to be in a lot of trouble, thats over a million quid a year less. Not good for their finances.
Short Money is fairly restricted in use for official Parliamentary business - research, office costs etc.
It's useful but can't be mixed with general party funds. It'll hurt the SNP... but, frankly, the costs covered by Short Money also reduce for them because there's much less you can do - motions, debates, questions, amendments etc - with nine MPs.
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
I asked during the night but if the Gaza Indys got together into a parliamentary group, do they get Short money or is that only based on the election night results?
No. It's results of the last General Election for any registered party they stood for.
Opposition parties get public funding (known as Short money) based on the number of seats and votes they win. Here's what different parties can expect each year: • Conservatives – £5.05m • Liberal Democrats – £2.27m • Reform – £961k • Green – £501k • SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election: • Conservatives – n/a (gov) • Liberal Democrats – £1.03m • Reform – n/a (did not exist) • Green – £200k • SNP – £1.53m
Excellent. Having a million quid a year extra, the Lib Dems could pay back the Michael Brown fraud victims entirely over the next parliament.
SNP are going to be in a lot of trouble, thats over a million quid a year less. Not good for their finances.
Did I mention that I am grinning like a cheshire cat?
Seamus Logan had to crowdfund his campaign. Which was a couple of leaflets and a small team knocking endlessly. We spent £2,500 on Facebook and got in their face so much that they bitterly complained about how much reach we'd had. £2.5k was beyond them...
We’re delighted to have called the winner of 92% of seats correctly at the 2024 general election, including calling all individual party seat tallies to within our estimated bounds
We’re likewise very pleased to have closely captured the vote share of all main parties at the 2024 general election
What this means IMHO, is that the talk of a Tory civil war is overblown. The remaining MPs are likely to be less ideological and will mainly be looking for a safe pair of hands. I would put my money on Barclay.
It also wouldn't surprise me if we get 1-2 defections to Reform (perhaps Suella)
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems. Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time. Labour? Er... no. Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
If the LDs didn't continue to push for it, I'd never vote for them again!
Less than 34% of the vote, and the Labour party have won a massive majority. How very very bizarre.
Labour's support is a mile wide and an inch deep, and we've now proved that you can gain less than 2% vote share and over 200 seats.
It also means the reverse can happen. 5 years from now the whole thing could switch and the Conservatives could take 200 back and form a government.
Fair point re the LDs - I am sure they'll stick with it.
I really think Starmer should move towards PR, a) because it's the right thing to do and b) because more cynically, it would block the Tory membership from ever again dictating how the country is run.
I doubt it will happen sadly, and struggle to see what the route would be even if Starmer saw things as I do.
Anyone with any political nouse will see the absolutely perilous situation that exists for Labour now (at least electorially).
All that needs to happen is for the opposition to form around one other party and Labour could be 200 seats down next time without losing a single vote.
But yes, there is no route through for Labour to solve that problem. Indeed, many of the 200 MPs they've just won who might be at risk of such a strategy will probably be unable to recognise the huge danger they are in.
In March 2029, we could all be talking about which Cabinet minister manages to retain his seat at the upcoming bloodbath, and whether Starmer himself will hang on or not.
Blair should get credit for not having the kind of cosmetic procedures that an American politician would routinely undergo.
The state of his teeth have always mystified me. Yes, yes, I know it's impossible to find a dentist in the UK these days but why didn't he get them sorted 20 years ago?
Chief whip of a party with four seats. So that's one leader to give the orders, one chief whip to organise them and two others to vote as instructed. Lieutenant, Sergeant, two Privates. The British class structure in microcosm
Starmer's such a lucky general; he just managed to get 291 more seats than the Tories. Incredibly lucky.
I think I'd rather have support that's a mile wide and an inch deep than support that's an inch wide and an inch deep.
By the way, I thought Starmer's Downing St. speech was very impressive. Those itching for his early downfall are going to be very disappointed.
I am choosing to not be cynical, nor pessimistic. I am hopeful that the Starmer government will genuinely work hard to restore a bit of faith in politics, and return to the social contract.
They have a hell of a job awaiting them, but I trust them roughly seventy billion times more than the Tories to actually deliver on it.
Comments
Listening to Suella (and JRM) it's a shame neither ever got into government. Maybe if Suella had been given one of the high offices of state the Conservatives might have won.
The Scottish Government has snuck out its response to the Cass Review on the day the governing party has been reduced to just nine seats and on the busiest political news day of the year.
A classic of the genre.
https://x.com/conor_matchett/status/1809198853683560524
Eventually the incels (male) and environmentacrazies (female) in their late teens/early 20s will turn up to the polling place too.
I backed SKS from day one, proudly voted for him knowing only he could lead Labour to victory. I thought that was maybe a tall order - but he was clearly the only candidate who could do it.
I called the peak of Johnson at Hartlepool when others said he would govern for a decade. People said SKS's approach was baffling but he followed it from day one and it's resulted in success. Slow, boring, frustrating. But he picked a strategy, stuck to it and has delivered.
Whatever the vote shares, to do what he has done in five years, will undoubtedly put him in the history books. Falling just short of Tony Blair's majority almost due to a rounding error, I believe he can make an argument to being Labour's most significant leader ever.
Now, to work. My vote is not held for good. I will resign my Labour membership if he does not deliver - and I will be prepared to vote Tory if they go back to the politics of myself and many others.
But today, is a good day.
#72
Plotted here against Blair’s 1997 landslide for scale.
Just an extraordinarily motivated anti-Tory vote 🔴🌊
https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1809192067991531578
LDs don't really need PR anymore it seems.
Tories? I doubt they'll have the chutzpah to switch their stance, even though FPTP has shafted them this time.
Labour? Er... no.
Reform and Greens will continue to bang the drum from the margins, I guess.
The zenith? The bungee jump. "Take the Leap" was the challenge. "Do something you've never done before".
And here it is. Our biggest win in a century. 71 seats, likely 72 seats tomorrow. Never mind the people saying we'd lose the by-election wins. Some of last night's wins were by-election swings. Extraordinary wins. A party machine which had a brilliant strategy and targeting, and was flexible enough to know when we had target seats in the bag to move to the next tranche. And then the tranche beyond that.
We lost a few which annoy - Hunt's seat a prime example. But hard to be upset with that haul. Or the way we set about it. I remain buzzing and grinning and all of that to have been part of it.
But well-spotted - I blame tiredness / autocorrect / emotional overload!
First Past the Post has shat itself totally.
Let's hope someone didn't get ahead of themselves with the shredder.
Because of Reform and their obviously unfair results, it's no longer seen as only an elite drawing-room obsession, or just a self-interested , only lefty one.
Less than 34% of the vote, and the Labour party have won a massive majority. How very very bizarre.
Labour's support is a mile wide and an inch deep, and we've now proved that you can gain less than 2% vote share and over 200 seats.
It also means the reverse can happen. 5 years from now the whole thing could switch and the Conservatives could take 200 back and form a government.
UKIP: 6530 votes nationwide
It's on!
Six months ago many (me included) thought he'd have to resign over the PO scandal.
Boris Johnson did two things, he saved us from Jeremy Corbyn (I know I supported him) and Laura Pidcock.
That may not be right - just what I've heard.
I really think Starmer should move towards PR, a) because it's the right thing to do and b) because more cynically, it would block the Tory membership from ever again dictating how the country is run.
I doubt it will happen sadly, and struggle to see what the route would be even if Starmer saw things as I do.
• Conservatives – £5.05m
• Liberal Democrats – £2.27m
• Reform – £961k
• Green – £501k
• SNP – £344k…
…For comparison, here's what the parties could have expect if they'd won the same number of seats/votes as last election:
• Conservatives – n/a (gov)
• Liberal Democrats – £1.03m
• Reform – n/a (did not exist)
• Green – £200k
• SNP – £1.53m
https://x.com/jamesrbuk/status/1809205748821381502?
It's not about the % vote share - it's about the gap between 1st and 2nd.
If next time Labour gain 1%, but the Conservatives gain 10%, then Labour will lose a load of seats to them.
When did Tftd go away in order to return?
I think I'd rather have support that's a mile wide and an inch deep than support that's an inch wide and an inch deep.
By the way, I thought Starmer's Downing St. speech was very impressive. Those itching for his early downfall are going to be very disappointed.
"We predicted a landslide", seems like they predicted that on the basis not of Labour's vote efficiency but because of putting Labour way too high and using UNS.
They got it right by accident.
How do you deliver in government in 18 months when Labour are clear there will be no more money quickly and you claim you need billions to fix the problems you've been unable to for 17 years?
Uphill battle - arguably impossible
https://x.com/conor_matchett/status/1809179733340324050
But people are far too confident in predicting a Labour downfall, I remain sceptical just now.
When will these morons understand that you can't do that.
It's useful but can't be mixed with general party funds. It'll hurt the SNP... but, frankly, the costs covered by Short Money also reduce for them because there's much less you can do - motions, debates, questions, amendments etc - with nine MPs.
Personally I'd get Campbell as an MP or into the Lords.
Seamus Logan had to crowdfund his campaign. Which was a couple of leaflets and a small team knocking endlessly. We spent £2,500 on Facebook and got in their face so much that they bitterly complained about how much reach we'd had. £2.5k was beyond them...
Farage promises a fresh start for his party and kicks out all candidates facing racism allegations. Insists he will professionalise Reform.
Lee Anderson will be chief whip.
https://x.com/harry_horton/status/1809214433001947497
We’re likewise very pleased to have closely captured the vote share of all main parties at the 2024 general election
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1809215290078531630
Erhhhh
All that needs to happen is for the opposition to form around one other party and Labour could be 200 seats down next time without losing a single vote.
But yes, there is no route through for Labour to solve that problem. Indeed, many of the 200 MPs they've just won who might be at risk of such a strategy will probably be unable to recognise the huge danger they are in.
In March 2029, we could all be talking about which Cabinet minister manages to retain his seat at the upcoming bloodbath, and whether Starmer himself will hang on or not.
They have a hell of a job awaiting them, but I trust them roughly seventy billion times more than the Tories to actually deliver on it.