Howdy, Stranger!

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

A wobbly outcome: when voting systems attack – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,179
edited September 29 in General
imageA wobbly outcome: when voting systems attack – politicalbetting.com

(For the purposes of this article, I’m only looking at constituencies in Great Britain. Sorry, Northern Ireland, but your politics are a rule unto themselves. Plus – we’re primarily concerned about who can win control of the UK-wide Government).

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,646
    First like Trump!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,449
    edited August 31
    Sandpit said:

    First like Trump!

    In that case second like Ukraine

    Edit, err, or even third like, um...

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474
    Sandpit said:

    First like Trump!

    No wonder his wives and even his porn stars get fed up with him if he keeps coming first.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    Thanks Andy!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    I think a good thing is next week the Tories start voting in their leadership election using a non FTTP voting system (the exhaustive ballot AKA quasi-AV).

    If it is good enough for the Tories then it is good enough for the country.

    Of course Starmer was elected by pure AV and he's proven to win landslides.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,838
    That's a very interesting graph, thanks for putting it together.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474

    I think a good thing is next week the Tories start voting in their leadership election using a non FTTP voting system (the exhaustive ballot AKA quasi-AV).

    If it is good enough for the Tories then it is good enough for the country.

    Of course Starmer was elected by pure AV and he's proven to win landslides.

    So was Corbyn, although he would have won with or without it (as did Starmer).

    Your point being?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    ydoethur said:

    I think a good thing is next week the Tories start voting in their leadership election using a non FTTP voting system (the exhaustive ballot AKA quasi-AV).

    If it is good enough for the Tories then it is good enough for the country.

    Of course Starmer was elected by pure AV and he's proven to win landslides.

    So was Corbyn, although he would have won with or without it (as did Starmer).

    Your point being?
    Lawyer + AV = Success.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474

    Sandpit said:

    First like Trump!

    In that case second like Ukraine

    Edit, err, or even third like, um...

    Nick Palmer, who is a gentleman?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,557
    Wow. That's quite a graph.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    edited August 31
    Chortle.

    I guess he went to them for advice?




    https://x.com/Jas_Athwal/status/1050364793415192576
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,449
    ydoethur said:

    Thank you Andy, very interesting.

    Of course, there is one other point to make - constituencies being much more vulnerable and therefore forcing MPs to pay attention to their voters could be considered a good thing.

    One of the big weaknesses of FPTP is it would endlessly return complete numpties like Fabricant or Lavery no matter what they did or didn't do because they wore the right rosette. If that's no longer the case - and it clearly isn't - the issue of fairness (somewhat amplified!) remains but one argument for voting reform is gone.

    I think Labour's mega majority on a tiny, tiny vote share and Farage's five seats on a bigger vote share than the 70 plus seat LDs means FPTP is a failed system.

    This election despite the larger than ever range of parties amplifies that the system is broken.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474

    Chortle.

    I guess he went to them for advice?




    https://x.com/Jas_Athwal/status/1050364793415192576

    Surely he means that he is masturbating over their actions?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913
    A great header - thanks!

    I think this feeds directly into the @Casino_Royale 'Weren't the Tories Great' musings at the end of the last thread. When you are political of course you see your side as good. At least in public... But there does have to be awareness when that is purely spin, and in truth you aren't good.

    The SNP conference is delivering us comedy with ex MPs bemoaning how "independence" wasn't accepted by punters as the obvious and immediate solution to their need to see a GP or pay the bills. We will see the same from Tory leadership hopefuls like Jenrick (stop sniggering at the back) - prefaced here by CR - that the Tory way is right and the electorate are wrong.

    Politics is story-telling and selling that narrative. You need to sound authentic and convincing - but the offer has to be compelling. And here's the thing. If you want to be pure and true to your "convictions" then you have to accept that sometimes you will lose. What you think, what you want are not always the same as what other people think and want, regardless of how right and virtuous you personally believe you are.

    Successful parties adapt their pitch to the electorate's needs and mood. The Tories more than anyone. With such a perilous position after the election, and so many of their remaining seats teetering as the OP demonstrates, a period of listening and reflecting - and not telling - would be beneficial to the blue team...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,557
    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,313
    Labour narrowly have the most of these seats which were won on under 30% of the vote. However they are more likely to lose such seats than the Tories are in my view as in most of them the Tory and Reform vote was comfortably bigger than the Labour vote. If the next Tory leader can squeeze the Reform vote
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,313
    ydoethur said:

    Thank you Andy, very interesting.

    Of course, there is one other point to make - constituencies being much more vulnerable and therefore forcing MPs to pay attention to their voters could be considered a good thing.

    One of the big weaknesses of FPTP is it would endlessly return complete numpties like Fabricant or Lavery no matter what they did or didn't do because they wore the right rosette. If that's no longer the case - and it clearly isn't - the issue of fairness (somewhat amplified!) remains but one argument for voting reform is gone.

    Fabricant was actually a hard working and well known constituency MP as well as being a colourful character. Which is why he held his seat for 30 years until national swing removed him narrowly last month
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,194
    Also, when did 'maverick' become code for 'racist'
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Thank you Andy, very interesting.

    Of course, there is one other point to make - constituencies being much more vulnerable and therefore forcing MPs to pay attention to their voters could be considered a good thing.

    One of the big weaknesses of FPTP is it would endlessly return complete numpties like Fabricant or Lavery no matter what they did or didn't do because they wore the right rosette. If that's no longer the case - and it clearly isn't - the issue of fairness (somewhat amplified!) remains but one argument for voting reform is gone.

    Fabricant was actually a hard working and well known constituency MP as well as being a colourful character. Which is why he held his seat for 30 years until national swing removed him narrowly last month
    No he wasn't.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913
    DavidL said:

    What I get from the 2024 election is that the volatility of voting patterns has increased sharply which has brought many more seats into play than was traditionally the case. This really started with the collapse of the red wall in 2019 but hit the Tories big time this time around.

    This seems to me to be a good thing, on the whole. The preponderance of safe seats was unhealthy and made too many of our politicians indifferent to what we actually thought.

    Go back before 2019 - it started with Brexit. "The system" has been failing every larger numbers of people for decades, and the ability of parties to persuade people that it was in their interests to vote for "the system" broke down. Then Cameron blinked and offered people the opportunity to vote against the system, and so they did.

    Where Starmer critics are right (and had you heard me in the pub the weekend before last with Labour councillor friends you would include me as a Starmer critic) is that Labour have run with "change" with no real ambition for what that means or how to go about it.

    Starmer has the Big Picture. Offer hope. Identify big themes and box them off into 5 ills to be cured. Their problem is how that translates into strategies and policies. With a majority of 704 he really could do whatever he wanted to radically shift the overton window and with it the political landscape. And yet there he is off having weaselly bilaterals with France and Germany saying "nothing has changed" with regards to relations with EU/EEA/CU. He's not trying to bypass the huge cost of short-termism by investing now in training and staffing so that we get the public services people need and a significant cost saving.

    No, instead he's planning to kill the hospitality industry and maintain the grindcore poverty brake on the economy which costs more than the solution in both emergency measures and crime.

    I don't get the Starmer programme at all. Which is why I am not "one of us" as my mate drunkenly insisted last week.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,838
    F1: also, Colapinto being just two-tenths off Albon's good. Only practice, but still a good sign given it was only his second session.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474
    Incidentally, I don't think we've covered this:

    https://apnews.com/article/nebraska-abortion-november-election-ballot-measure-513d8bde38f15dee16e9cd216070d704

    Could that possibly get more bizarre?

    The Governor has said he expects the 'enshrine current position' amendment to win, although polling suggests he's being foolish in saying that. But if they both win, just watch the chaos unfold.

    Also surely guarantees that bonus seat for the Dems given the boost it will give to turnout in their target demographics.

    You also wonder what that might do to the Senate races (note plural) although I'll be very surprised if Ricketts doesn't win the special.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,557

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    Won't happen that way round
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,515
    edited August 31

    DavidL said:

    What I get from the 2024 election is that the volatility of voting patterns has increased sharply which has brought many more seats into play than was traditionally the case. This really started with the collapse of the red wall in 2019 but hit the Tories big time this time around.

    This seems to me to be a good thing, on the whole. The preponderance of safe seats was unhealthy and made too many of our politicians indifferent to what we actually thought.

    Go back before 2019 - it started with Brexit. "The system" has been failing every larger numbers of people for decades, and the ability of parties to persuade people that it was in their interests to vote for "the system" broke down. Then Cameron blinked and offered people the opportunity to vote against the system, and so they did.

    Where Starmer critics are right (and had you heard me in the pub the weekend before last with Labour councillor friends you would include me as a Starmer critic) is that Labour have run with "change" with no real ambition for what that means or how to go about it.

    Starmer has the Big Picture. Offer hope. Identify big themes and box them off into 5 ills to be cured. Their problem is how that translates into strategies and policies. With a majority of 704 he really could do whatever he wanted to radically shift the overton window and with it the political landscape. And yet there he is off having weaselly bilaterals with France and Germany saying "nothing has changed" with regards to relations with EU/EEA/CU. He's not trying to bypass the huge cost of short-termism by investing now in training and staffing so that we get the public services people need and a significant cost saving.

    No, instead he's planning to kill the hospitality industry and maintain the grindcore poverty brake on the economy which costs more than the solution in both emergency measures and crime.

    I don't get the Starmer programme at all. Which is why I am not "one of us" as my mate drunkenly insisted last week.
    The problem is systemic belief that the solutions in place are the only solutions that are *morally* viable.

    Which leads to the simple conclusion that (GWB style) that if you aren’t with us, you are against us - and therefore evil.

    Come up with answers that are both different and *moral*? But that would be to go against the True Way.

    If we shout a bit louder, it will all be fine.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474
    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey paddles into view making an electoral splash?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    Mercedes confirm Kimi Antonelli will replace Sir Lewis in 2025.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    Won't happen that way round
    Why not? You and the rest of the party appear not to be listening to the electorate. As you are right and the electorate are wrong, do you expect that you will start to listen to them? Or will the electorate do a Bobby Ewing, come out of the shower one morning and say "actually Rishi / Truss / Shagger were much better than this government, I'm off to vote for Robert "make the kids cry" Jenrick?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,838
    Mr. Eagles, slightly surprised by the timing but not the announcement. Wolff clearly thinks he's VerstappenV2, or at least doesn't want to risk someone else getting him. Mildly surprised he wasn't available for Williams this year, just to learn the basics.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    £150 a pop? Naah.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754

    Mr. Eagles, slightly surprised by the timing but not the announcement. Wolff clearly thinks he's VerstappenV2, or at least doesn't want to risk someone else getting him. Mildly surprised he wasn't available for Williams this year, just to learn the basics.

    I am just glad they haven't signed Verstappen or I would have give up my Mercedes and boycott them for as long as the Dutch shunt drove for them.

    I haven't drunk Red Bull since Verstappen started driving for them.

    To be fair I have only ever drunk Red Bull once in my life and that was in 2002.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,209

    DavidL said:

    What I get from the 2024 election is that the volatility of voting patterns has increased sharply which has brought many more seats into play than was traditionally the case. This really started with the collapse of the red wall in 2019 but hit the Tories big time this time around.

    This seems to me to be a good thing, on the whole. The preponderance of safe seats was unhealthy and made too many of our politicians indifferent to what we actually thought.

    Go back before 2019 - it started with Brexit. "The system" has been failing every larger numbers of people for decades, and the ability of parties to persuade people that it was in their interests to vote for "the system" broke down. Then Cameron blinked and offered people the opportunity to vote against the system, and so they did.

    Where Starmer critics are right (and had you heard me in the pub the weekend before last with Labour councillor friends you would include me as a Starmer critic) is that Labour have run with "change" with no real ambition for what that means or how to go about it.

    Starmer has the Big Picture. Offer hope. Identify big themes and box them off into 5 ills to be cured. Their problem is how that translates into strategies and policies. With a majority of 704 he really could do whatever he wanted to radically shift the overton window and with it the political landscape. And yet there he is off having weaselly bilaterals with France and Germany saying "nothing has changed" with regards to relations with EU/EEA/CU. He's not trying to bypass the huge cost of short-termism by investing now in training and staffing so that we get the public services people need and a significant cost saving.

    No, instead he's planning to kill the hospitality industry and maintain the grindcore poverty brake on the economy which costs more than the solution in both emergency measures and crime.

    I don't get the Starmer programme at all. Which is why I am not "one of us" as my mate drunkenly insisted last week.
    The problem with Starmer always comes down to him not being different enough from the Conservatives.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    £150 a pop? Naah.
    I've paid more to see Madonna and The Rolling Stones in the past.

    I paid £350 a seat to see The Rolling Stones in 2006.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474

    Mr. Eagles, slightly surprised by the timing but not the announcement. Wolff clearly thinks he's VerstappenV2, or at least doesn't want to risk someone else getting him. Mildly surprised he wasn't available for Williams this year, just to learn the basics.

    I am just glad they haven't signed Verstappen or I would have give up my Mercedes and boycott them for as long as the Dutch shunt drove for them.

    I haven't drunk Red Bull since Verstappen started driving for them.

    To be fair I have only ever drunk Red Bull once in my life and that was in 2002.
    I've never even drunk Red Bull. Having looked at what was in it, I decided if I wanted to throw up soap would be cheaper.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809
    Brilliant header, with a lot to think on.

    Labour have certainly got off to a faltering start (they need some of that joy that Harris/Walz has generated), and it is unclear where they will shed voters to. My impression it is the Greens (wanting more tax and spend, and support for Palestine) and the LDs (wanting less top down heavy handedness) that will benefit, but we will see.

    It's a long time to the next election, and while individual seats may be precarious (though outnumbered 5 to one by seats that are not precarious) Labour's majority is not even slightly precarious and they will get a full term. Expect a May 2029 GE.

    The Tories though do look vulnerable, particularly if they fail to understand why the country so enthusiastically voted them out by carefully choosing a tactical vote to maximise Tory losses.

    The concept of 35%+ as the threshold where winning a seat becomes probable is a good one, and one reason that I think Reform cannot really break through on a national stage. They have a low ceiling and Farage is an ageing agitator rather than an organiser.

    There is though a whiff of Weimar about such an unstable political system, with multiple competing fissile blocks focused on mutal antagonism.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,557

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    Won't happen that way round
    Why not? You and the rest of the party appear not to be listening to the electorate. As you are right and the electorate are wrong, do you expect that you will start to listen to them? Or will the electorate do a Bobby Ewing, come out of the shower one morning and say "actually Rishi / Truss / Shagger were much better than this government, I'm off to vote for Robert "make the kids cry" Jenrick?
    Err, no. This administration will hit lots of centre-right voters where it hurts. And plenty of naturally centre-right seats only fell to Labour, and even the LDs in places, through a massively split vote.

    To stop it, and check the government, the only solution is to vote Conservative. Ideally back to a hung parliament.

    Then they can't lay down their bullshit easily.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,557

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    All the Oasis people are right here, right now.

    Know what I mean?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,557
    FF43 said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Although Labour definitely could lose its majority at the next election, I don't think the chart particularly supports that hypothesis. Labour has 40 or so seats with less than 35%, or one tenth of the 411 total.

    Meanwhile on a similar cough the Conservatives also have 40 or so seats with less than 35%, making up a third of its 121 total.
    Labour lost 90 seats and they've lost their majority.

    Almost 50 of those already are "fake seats" and only delivered to them by centre-right voters splitting and going awol.

    All Labour has to do is royally piss them off and they'll unite to defeat the Labour candidate. And boy oh boy are they pissing them off, and that's before the end of their second month in office.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,313
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Thank you Andy, very interesting.

    Of course, there is one other point to make - constituencies being much more vulnerable and therefore forcing MPs to pay attention to their voters could be considered a good thing.

    One of the big weaknesses of FPTP is it would endlessly return complete numpties like Fabricant or Lavery no matter what they did or didn't do because they wore the right rosette. If that's no longer the case - and it clearly isn't - the issue of fairness (somewhat amplified!) remains but one argument for voting reform is gone.

    Fabricant was actually a hard working and well known constituency MP as well as being a colourful character. Which is why he held his seat for 30 years until national swing removed him narrowly last month
    No he wasn't.
    He was very well known in the city, lived near the cathedral and had higher name recognition than any MP for Lichfield has ever had before
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,557
    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    £150 a pop? Naah.
    There's always been folk with more money than sense, as my Mancunian mother often points out.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809

    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
    Under what circumstances do you think they will lose a majority before 2029?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,313
    FF43 said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Although Labour definitely could lose its majority at the next election, I don't think the chart particularly supports that hypothesis. Labour has 40 or so seats with less than 35%, or one tenth of the 411 total.

    Meanwhile on a similar cough the Conservatives also have 40 or so seats with less than 35%, making up a third of its 121 total.
    There is already a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since the general election on the new BMG poll for the Independent last night
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,515

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    All the Oasis people are right here, right now.

    Know what I mean?
    Thought for the day -

    Liam Gallagher is the Nigel Farage of music.

    He’s used his meagre talents to create chaos at every turn and his narcissism surprises even those in his own industry. Which is well known for creating and enabling narcissists.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,505

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
  • JameiJamei Posts: 59
    Does anyone know why the North Carolina market on Betfair and other places is so out of odds with the opinion polls and modelling? This isn't the case with the other swing states.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
    Under what circumstances do you think they will lose a majority before 2029?
    Mass renunciation or withdrawal of whip, over Gaza and/or kid starving policy.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    One of my staff (aged 23) utterly poleaxed me this week, she said to me 'Guys your age are weirdly obsessed by Oasis'.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913
    Foxy said:

    Brilliant header, with a lot to think on.

    Labour have certainly got off to a faltering start (they need some of that joy that Harris/Walz has generated), and it is unclear where they will shed voters to. My impression it is the Greens (wanting more tax and spend, and support for Palestine) and the LDs (wanting less top down heavy handedness) that will benefit, but we will see.

    It's a long time to the next election, and while individual seats may be precarious (though outnumbered 5 to one by seats that are not precarious) Labour's majority is not even slightly precarious and they will get a full term. Expect a May 2029 GE.

    The Tories though do look vulnerable, particularly if they fail to understand why the country so enthusiastically voted them out by carefully choosing a tactical vote to maximise Tory losses.

    The concept of 35%+ as the threshold where winning a seat becomes probable is a good one, and one reason that I think Reform cannot really break through on a national stage. They have a low ceiling and Farage is an ageing agitator rather than an organiser.

    There is though a whiff of Weimar about such an unstable political system, with multiple competing fissile blocks focused on mutal antagonism.

    We can all identify the problems - grindcore poverty, investment into services hived off so that we spend record amounts to have front line services starved of cash, poorly educated people gaslit on social media to form hate mobs, infrastructure crumbling and dragging the economy backwards.

    UK PLC would hopefully appoint a visionary new CEO, reaffirm the vision thing, and ruthlessly go after the waste, incompetence and inefficiencies to get the thing buzzing again. Instead we have Starmer, who barely dares to speak of vision, and dare not go after the inefficiencies because the gaslit might be cross. So instead of transforming UK PLC we're going to repaint it, change the logo and invest in motivational statement wall art.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809
    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    That's where you get one of those political realignment that occur once a century or so, like in the 1920s.

    And both are coughing and wheezing.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Thank you Andy, very interesting.

    Of course, there is one other point to make - constituencies being much more vulnerable and therefore forcing MPs to pay attention to their voters could be considered a good thing.

    One of the big weaknesses of FPTP is it would endlessly return complete numpties like Fabricant or Lavery no matter what they did or didn't do because they wore the right rosette. If that's no longer the case - and it clearly isn't - the issue of fairness (somewhat amplified!) remains but one argument for voting reform is gone.

    Fabricant was actually a hard working and well known constituency MP as well as being a colourful character. Which is why he held his seat for 30 years until national swing removed him narrowly last month
    No he wasn't.
    He was very well known in the city, lived near the cathedral and had higher name recognition than any MP for Lichfield has ever had before
    He spent all his time in London or mid-Wales, you numpty.

    And yes, people knew him. Do you know that they used to substitute a 'u' for that 'a' in his surname?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,685
    @Casino_Royale if you’re counting on nostalgia for the Sunak Truss Johnson era propelling the Tories into office, that might be a long shot

    “Don’t go back to Tory chaos” or “Don’t risk giving the keys to those that created the mess” is likely to be a big theme of the next election.

    The Tories have a long way back even if Labour cough.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,474
    Trump really is losing it.

    He would never have fallen into this trap of confusion in 2016.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy547v72nd4o

    So now he's managed to piss off pro and anti abortion activists. All in one go.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,209
    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Although Labour definitely could lose its majority at the next election, I don't think the chart particularly supports that hypothesis. Labour has 40 or so seats with less than 35%, or one tenth of the 411 total.

    Meanwhile on a similar cough the Conservatives also have 40 or so seats with less than 35%, making up a third of its 121 total.
    There is already a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since the general election on the new BMG poll for the Independent last night
    Do you have full figures for that poll, because I think it implies an increase for Reform, which doesn't really help the Tories even if it's at the expense of Labour?
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Thank you Andy, very interesting.

    Of course, there is one other point to make - constituencies being much more vulnerable and therefore forcing MPs to pay attention to their voters could be considered a good thing.

    One of the big weaknesses of FPTP is it would endlessly return complete numpties like Fabricant or Lavery no matter what they did or didn't do because they wore the right rosette. If that's no longer the case - and it clearly isn't - the issue of fairness (somewhat amplified!) remains but one argument for voting reform is gone.

    Fabricant was actually a hard working and well known constituency MP as well as being a colourful character. Which is why he held his seat for 30 years until national swing removed him narrowly last month
    No he wasn't.
    He was very well known in the city, lived near the cathedral and had higher name recognition than any MP for Lichfield has ever had before
    He spent all his time in London or mid-Wales, you numpty.

    And yes, people knew him. Do you know that they used to substitute a 'u' for that 'a' in his surname?
    Thank goodness we are all too mature to snigger at yesterday's headline "Hunt wins Paralympic silver as Cundy misses out."
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,258

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    Won't happen that way round
    The right wing vote could move up five points, but if that expresses itself via a seven point increase for Reform and a two point drop in Conservative support, then it's entirely possible that it results in a larger left wing majority in Westminster.

    It took 14 years from 1983 to 1997 before the Alliance/LibDem and Labour votes became efficient. But now they are highly efficient: there are virtually no Labour-LibDem marginals.

    By contrast, in addition to the Conservative-Reform marginals, there is the much bigger list of seats where the combined Conservative-Reform total would win the seat from the incumbent. If the right wing vote were to become efficient, then you could see a big gains.

    But how quickly will that happen? After the shellecking of 1983, it didn't happen in 1987, and while it improved in 1992, it was only in 1997 (remember GROT and "Labour tactically voting LibDem" posters?) that the left wing vote became really efficient.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,045
    Sandpit said:

    First like Trump!

    Are you now a solid ‘I am a fan of Trump actually’?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,258
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Thank you Andy, very interesting.

    Of course, there is one other point to make - constituencies being much more vulnerable and therefore forcing MPs to pay attention to their voters could be considered a good thing.

    One of the big weaknesses of FPTP is it would endlessly return complete numpties like Fabricant or Lavery no matter what they did or didn't do because they wore the right rosette. If that's no longer the case - and it clearly isn't - the issue of fairness (somewhat amplified!) remains but one argument for voting reform is gone.

    Fabricant was actually a hard working and well known constituency MP as well as being a colourful character. Which is why he held his seat for 30 years until national swing removed him narrowly last month
    No he wasn't.
    Oh come on, what @HYUFD wrote was at least partially true.

    He was definitely well known. And we was certainly an MP.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809
    mercator said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
    Under what circumstances do you think they will lose a majority before 2029?
    Mass renunciation or withdrawal of whip, over Gaza and/or kid starving policy.
    So a 1% chance?

    I suspect that Starmers plan is to get the pain over early and to deliver real improvements across government services by the mid term.

    The next Labour election will be very much be "We've turned the corner, don't let the Tories ruin things again".
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,324

    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    One of my staff (aged 23) utterly poleaxed me this week, she said to me 'Guys your age are weirdly obsessed by Oasis'.
    I’m still suffering from the colleague who didn’t know the film Twelve Monkeys… and then pointed out it was released before he was born…

  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913

    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    One of my staff (aged 23) utterly poleaxed me this week, she said to me 'Guys your age are weirdly obsessed by Oasis'.
    September 1994. Back into Oldham Sixth Form College for the start of Year 13 and in the media studies studio our video editing is interrupted by someone putting Definitely Maybe on the Big Speakers. Loud. WTAF is that, they sound amazing.

    These singles. With 4 songs per disk and the "B-sides" are as good as the headline single. Like Pokemon Go, you have to collect them all.

    Autumn 1995. Sheffield University. Tapton Halls of Residence. Friday and Saturday nights. Someone has "Don't Look Back In Anger" playing. Loud. With people coming over to drunkenly bellow it en masse.

    Oasis were *phenomenal*. And then just as quickly as it started, it stopped. Be Here Now. Meh. The other post Bonehead albums. Meh at best.

    Imagine the set list next year being packed with tracks from Be Here Now onwards. OK, if they went out and redid the Maine Road 1996 setlist it would be phenomenal. Or is it just that that set was phenomenal back in 1996?

    I missed seeing Oasis first time out, just as I missed Pink Floyd and Genesis. I've seen Waters and Gilmour multiple times over. I skipped the 2007 Genesis reunion as they sounded dull. And don't talk to me about their recent abomintion. I just can't help thinking that this Oasis reunion will be heavy on the nostalgia and light on quality...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,258
    ydoethur said:

    Incidentally, I don't think we've covered this:

    https://apnews.com/article/nebraska-abortion-november-election-ballot-measure-513d8bde38f15dee16e9cd216070d704

    Could that possibly get more bizarre?

    The Governor has said he expects the 'enshrine current position' amendment to win, although polling suggests he's being foolish in saying that. But if they both win, just watch the chaos unfold.

    Also surely guarantees that bonus seat for the Dems given the boost it will give to turnout in their target demographics.

    You also wonder what that might do to the Senate races (note plural) although I'll be very surprised if Ricketts doesn't win the special.

    California gets contradictory ballot propositions all the time.

    Voters like to tie politicians hands, bind their feet, and them demand they run sub 10 second 100 meters.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,838
    I've never drunk a Red Bull, or any energy drink (unless you count Lucozade, which was back when I was a kid and it was recovery medicine).
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,515
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
    Under what circumstances do you think they will lose a majority before 2029?
    The mood music in the political world is in a very unusual state.

    As the excellent header shows.

    The recent election was about chucking the Tories out. There was no 1997 style tidal wave* to chuck *Labour* in.

    We could very easily go into the next election with 3-4 parties on around 20% each

    Yes, Labour has a large majority in the House of Commons. But under FPTP, it can evaporate. As did the Tory majority - just weeks ago.

    The old tribal loyalties to one of the Big Two and A Half are fraying. Increasingly people are prepared to say - if they are not the answer, next.

    *1997 was exaggerated in media, but anyway…
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,045
    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    R4's version of getting in on the youth market is endlessly going on about a couple of stroppy 40 somethings getting together for a divorce settlement tour with £1000+ tickets.

    Feck, I just checked and they're 50 somethings!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    If I lived in Scotland I would vote SNP because finally there is a party that will focus on the middle classes and stop pandering to the working classes.

    Swinney warns SNP: Win back middle class or face disaster

    Secret recording from private session reveals stark message from the first minister to party activists at Edinburgh conference


    John Swinney has warned SNP activists they must win back Scotland’s middle class or face another election drubbing, according to a leaked recording which lays bare the crisis facing the party.

    In a secret recording from a private session of the SNP conference, members pored over the disastrous general election in which the party lost 39 MPs.

    They were presented with internal polling analysis that showed swathes of voters switch to Labour once they begin earning an annual salary of more than “the low £20,000s”.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/article/swinney-warns-snp-win-back-middle-class-or-face-another-drubbing-rzjsxwzhw
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,656
    Has the comment order been reversed ?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,754
    Does Scottish popcorn taste different to regular popcorn?

    Police investigate senior civil servant over Alex Salmond inquiry

    James Hynd accused of making false statement, court told


    Detectives are investigating claims that a senior civil servant gave a false statement under oath to an inquiry into sexual misconduct allegations involving Alex Salmond.

    The Court of Session was told on Friday that Police Scotland was looking at the conduct of James Hynd, who was the Scottish government’s head of cabinet, parliament and governance during the inquiry.

    Salmond, 69, has brought legal action against the Scottish government seeking “significant damages” and compensation for loss of earnings that may total millions of pounds.

    The former first minister alleges “malfeasance” by civil servants past and present, arguing that they “conducted themselves improperly, in bad faith and beyond their powers” with the intention of damaging him. This allegedly happened during a botched investigation by civil servants over claims that Salmond had acted inappropriately towards a number of women during his time in office.

    Gordon Dangerfield, representing Salmond, told the judge, Lord Fairley, that the police investigation was called Operation Broadcroft and was headed by a Detective Superintendent Graham Lannigan.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/article/police-investigate-civil-servant-over-alex-salmond-inquiry-jwzszkx88
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,847
    Thanks @Andy_Cooke an excellent article and a bit different from the norm and I agree with you the LD figures are different to what I would have suspected. Great to see an article posting new data and analysis from what we normally see.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
    Under what circumstances do you think they will lose a majority before 2029?
    The mood music in the political world is in a very unusual state.

    As the excellent header shows.

    The recent election was about chucking the Tories out. There was no 1997 style tidal wave* to chuck *Labour* in.

    We could very easily go into the next election with 3-4 parties on around 20% each

    Yes, Labour has a large majority in the House of Commons. But under FPTP, it can evaporate. As did the Tory majority - just weeks ago.

    The old tribal loyalties to one of the Big Two and A Half are fraying. Increasingly people are prepared to say - if they are not the answer, next.

    *1997 was exaggerated in media, but anyway…
    My point though is that while seats and elections are unstable, the Labour majority is as solid as a rock. Unjustly so perhaps, but that's FPTP*. Labour have 5 years and there's nothing that other parties can do about it.

    *as per the header, we need a better name than this for our electoral system.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,228
    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Although Labour definitely could lose its majority at the next election, I don't think the chart particularly supports that hypothesis. Labour has 40 or so seats with less than 35%, or one tenth of the 411 total.

    Meanwhile on a similar cough the Conservatives also have 40 or so seats with less than 35%, making up a third of its 121 total.
    There is already a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since the general election on the new BMG poll for the Independent last night
    Do you have full figures for that poll, because I think it implies an increase for Reform, which doesn't really help the Tories even if it's at the expense of Labour?
    Good morning

    Reform on 19 % (+1) but @HYUFD will respond by saying conservative and reform are on 45% !!!
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,847

    Has the comment order been reversed ?

    For a few days now. Is @rcs1000 anywhere need a resolution cos it is driving me bonkers.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913

    Does Scottish popcorn taste different to regular popcorn?

    Police investigate senior civil servant over Alex Salmond inquiry

    James Hynd accused of making false statement, court told


    Detectives are investigating claims that a senior civil servant gave a false statement under oath to an inquiry into sexual misconduct allegations involving Alex Salmond.

    The Court of Session was told on Friday that Police Scotland was looking at the conduct of James Hynd, who was the Scottish government’s head of cabinet, parliament and governance during the inquiry.

    Salmond, 69, has brought legal action against the Scottish government seeking “significant damages” and compensation for loss of earnings that may total millions of pounds.

    The former first minister alleges “malfeasance” by civil servants past and present, arguing that they “conducted themselves improperly, in bad faith and beyond their powers” with the intention of damaging him. This allegedly happened during a botched investigation by civil servants over claims that Salmond had acted inappropriately towards a number of women during his time in office.

    Gordon Dangerfield, representing Salmond, told the judge, Lord Fairley, that the police investigation was called Operation Broadcroft and was headed by a Detective Superintendent Graham Lannigan.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/article/police-investigate-civil-servant-over-alex-salmond-inquiry-jwzszkx88

    Alex Salmond isn't a nice person - despite living 4 miles away in the next village I haven't heard anyone say nice things about him (and that includes the local Yes supporters).

    But, the more that the circumstances of his ousting are probed, the more it appears that Very Bad Things were concocted to get him out of the way. With SNP friends like that, who needs enemies?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,881
    What Starmer needs to do is introduce a health passport card that must be presented on purchasing anything deemed unhealthy with the functionality to tax the transaction based upon your weekly or monthly purchases. So buy a pack of fags a day current tax, buy 2 a day each has the tax doubled etc. It is a wizard wheeze that would raise loads of tax for the good stuff like extra prisons and absolutely not a single downside!

    (note yes I am being sarcastic in case anyone didn't work it out)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,313

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Although Labour definitely could lose its majority at the next election, I don't think the chart particularly supports that hypothesis. Labour has 40 or so seats with less than 35%, or one tenth of the 411 total.

    Meanwhile on a similar cough the Conservatives also have 40 or so seats with less than 35%, making up a third of its 121 total.
    There is already a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since the general election on the new BMG poll for the Independent last night
    Do you have full figures for that poll, because I think it implies an increase for Reform, which doesn't really help the Tories even if it's at the expense of Labour?
    Good morning

    Reform on 19 % (+1) but @HYUFD will respond by saying conservative and reform are on 45% !!!
    Tories also up to 26%
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809
    edited August 31

    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    One of my staff (aged 23) utterly poleaxed me this week, she said to me 'Guys your age are weirdly obsessed by Oasis'.
    I’m still suffering from the colleague who didn’t know the film Twelve Monkeys… and then pointed out it was released before he was born…

    Perhaps if he travelled back in time he could find out what the 12 Monkeys were.

    (A great film by the way, and a rare example of a remake as good as the original, but very different).

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,007

    Foxy said:

    Brilliant header, with a lot to think on.

    Labour have certainly got off to a faltering start (they need some of that joy that Harris/Walz has generated), and it is unclear where they will shed voters to. My impression it is the Greens (wanting more tax and spend, and support for Palestine) and the LDs (wanting less top down heavy handedness) that will benefit, but we will see.

    It's a long time to the next election, and while individual seats may be precarious (though outnumbered 5 to one by seats that are not precarious) Labour's majority is not even slightly precarious and they will get a full term. Expect a May 2029 GE.

    The Tories though do look vulnerable, particularly if they fail to understand why the country so enthusiastically voted them out by carefully choosing a tactical vote to maximise Tory losses.

    The concept of 35%+ as the threshold where winning a seat becomes probable is a good one, and one reason that I think Reform cannot really break through on a national stage. They have a low ceiling and Farage is an ageing agitator rather than an organiser.

    There is though a whiff of Weimar about such an unstable political system, with multiple competing fissile blocks focused on mutal antagonism.

    We can all identify the problems - grindcore poverty, investment into services hived off so that we spend record amounts to have front line services starved of cash, poorly educated people gaslit on social media to form hate mobs, infrastructure crumbling and dragging the economy backwards.

    UK PLC would hopefully appoint a visionary new CEO, reaffirm the vision thing, and ruthlessly go after the waste, incompetence and inefficiencies to get the thing buzzing again. Instead we have Starmer, who barely dares to speak of vision, and dare not go after the inefficiencies because the gaslit might be cross. So instead of transforming UK PLC we're going to repaint it, change the logo and invest in motivational statement wall art.
    And the Tories look like offering Mr Jenrick, of bucket of magnolia emulsion fame?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,515
    s
    Foxy said:

    mercator said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
    Under what circumstances do you think they will lose a majority before 2029?
    Mass renunciation or withdrawal of whip, over Gaza and/or kid starving policy.
    So a 1% chance?

    I suspect that Starmers plan is to get the pain over early and to deliver real improvements across government services by the mid term.

    The next Labour election will be very much be "We've turned the corner, don't let the Tories ruin things again".
    To do anything in five years requires actually getting it done in 3.5 - otherwise there will be no noticeable effect by the next election.

    Unless primary legislation is used to override the system of enquires and process, serious changes will take decades.

    Good luck getting ground broken on a new town before the next election.

    Starmer has lived his entire career in the Process State. Will he overthrow it?

    Doing so is risky - look for The Bad Law Project to raise Caine. Angry articles in the Guardian. MPs defecting….
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,861
    Excellent piece thanks @Andy_Cooke
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,007

    s

    Foxy said:

    mercator said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Only if that cough lasts more than 5 years. They have a solid unshakeable majority.
    Absolutely hilarious post.
    Under what circumstances do you think they will lose a majority before 2029?
    Mass renunciation or withdrawal of whip, over Gaza and/or kid starving policy.
    So a 1% chance?

    I suspect that Starmers plan is to get the pain over early and to deliver real improvements across government services by the mid term.

    The next Labour election will be very much be "We've turned the corner, don't let the Tories ruin things again".
    To do anything in five years requires actually getting it done in 3.5 - otherwise there will be no noticeable effect by the next election.

    Unless primary legislation is used to override the system of enquires and process, serious changes will take decades.

    Good luck getting ground broken on a new town before the next election.

    Starmer has lived his entire career in the Process State. Will he overthrow it?

    Doing so is risky - look for The Bad Law Project to raise Caine. Angry articles in the Guardian. MPs defecting….
    Er, surely Cain not Caine, unless you think there will be a mutiny?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,670
    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    Agree. As 51% of the population (YouGov I think) have no interest in this, it would be fair to suggest that 75%+ of R4 Today audience have none at all.

    They have yet to mention the post modern Marxist ultra cool production of Mozart's Figaro set in a basement full of washing machines I saw at the Edinburgh festival a fornight ago. (I am not making this up). Probably more of the R4 Today audience would find this interesting.

    BTW, who or what is Oasis?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,293
    rcs1000 said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    Won't happen that way round
    The right wing vote could move up five points, but if that expresses itself via a seven point increase for Reform and a two point drop in Conservative support, then it's entirely possible that it results in a larger left wing majority in Westminster.

    It took 14 years from 1983 to 1997 before the Alliance/LibDem and Labour votes became efficient. But now they are highly efficient: there are virtually no Labour-LibDem marginals.

    By contrast, in addition to the Conservative-Reform marginals, there is the much bigger list of seats where the combined Conservative-Reform total would win the seat from the incumbent. If the right wing vote were to become efficient, then you could see a big gains.

    But how quickly will that happen? After the shellecking of 1983, it didn't happen in 1987, and while it improved in 1992, it was only in 1997 (remember GROT and "Labour tactically voting LibDem" posters?) that the left wing vote became really efficient.
    It's another manifestation of the point in Andy's header. Once you have multiple parties on each "side", the distribution of votes on each "side" matters a lot more than the raw vote totals.

    Labour's landslide was all about getting enough votes in lots and lots of places- losing votes where they were crazy-strong, gaining them proportionally where they were in second place, abandoning Nice Britain to the Lib Dems.

    Here's a graph from Dylan Difford that I've been looking for an excuse to post for a while. It's swings on individual seats election-by-election. The narrower the spike, the more uniform the swing;



    https://x.com/Dylan_Difford/status/1817522059955577211

    It really don't mean a thing, if it's uniform swing.


  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Brilliant header, with a lot to think on.

    Labour have certainly got off to a faltering start (they need some of that joy that Harris/Walz has generated), and it is unclear where they will shed voters to. My impression it is the Greens (wanting more tax and spend, and support for Palestine) and the LDs (wanting less top down heavy handedness) that will benefit, but we will see.

    It's a long time to the next election, and while individual seats may be precarious (though outnumbered 5 to one by seats that are not precarious) Labour's majority is not even slightly precarious and they will get a full term. Expect a May 2029 GE.

    The Tories though do look vulnerable, particularly if they fail to understand why the country so enthusiastically voted them out by carefully choosing a tactical vote to maximise Tory losses.

    The concept of 35%+ as the threshold where winning a seat becomes probable is a good one, and one reason that I think Reform cannot really break through on a national stage. They have a low ceiling and Farage is an ageing agitator rather than an organiser.

    There is though a whiff of Weimar about such an unstable political system, with multiple competing fissile blocks focused on mutal antagonism.

    We can all identify the problems - grindcore poverty, investment into services hived off so that we spend record amounts to have front line services starved of cash, poorly educated people gaslit on social media to form hate mobs, infrastructure crumbling and dragging the economy backwards.

    UK PLC would hopefully appoint a visionary new CEO, reaffirm the vision thing, and ruthlessly go after the waste, incompetence and inefficiencies to get the thing buzzing again. Instead we have Starmer, who barely dares to speak of vision, and dare not go after the inefficiencies because the gaslit might be cross. So instead of transforming UK PLC we're going to repaint it, change the logo and invest in motivational statement wall art.
    Thames Water is emblematic of the way the country has been run these last decades. A public asset sold off to foreign venture capital to fund current expenditure, looted for dividends and executive bonuses, squeezed by dubious financial engineering, then dumped back on the government as a failed organisation as full of shit as its rivers.

    We need a much better way of running a country than this.
    I'd summarise it in two ways politically:
    1) The Tories lost sight of capitalism because they became enfatuated with (donations from) Cronyism. Why bother investing in business and doing the hard things long term when you can sell it off today and take your cut now? More so when oligarchs and investment funds are such nice generous people.So yeah, Fuck Business
    2) Labour never really understood or trusted business. A strong regulatory framework enacted in the late 90s could have reigned in the excesses of the likes of Thames Water. But Labour missed the boat and presided over the years where the rot really set in.

    We need to invest heavily in infrastructure. Roads, Railways, Water, Power, Internet. A bonanza of jobs which can be created quickly, creating skilled workers with money in their pockets they can spend in the economy and create more jobs. And infrastructure which drives positive ROI and long term growth in our stagnant economy.

    Its win win. Except that "who will pay for it" and "we can't afford it" Tory mantras still ring out loudly. And so we will continue to pay stupid amounts as what we have crumbles further, whilst France, Spain, Germany et al pull ahead.

    Sigh.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,007
    kjh said:

    Has the comment order been reversed ?

    For a few days now. Is @rcs1000 anywhere need a resolution cos it is driving me bonkers.
    Agreed.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    algarkirk said:

    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    Agree. As 51% of the population (YouGov I think) have no interest in this, it would be fair to suggest that 75%+ of R4 Today audience have none at all.

    They have yet to mention the post modern Marxist ultra cool production of Mozart's Figaro set in a basement full of washing machines I saw at the Edinburgh festival a fornight ago. (I am not making this up). Probably more of the R4 Today audience would find this interesting.

    BTW, who or what is Oasis?
    Green crumbly stuff for flower arrangements
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,405
    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    Although Labour definitely could lose its majority at the next election, I don't think the chart particularly supports that hypothesis. Labour has 40 or so seats with less than 35%, or one tenth of the 411 total.

    Meanwhile on a similar cough the Conservatives also have 40 or so seats with less than 35%, making up a third of its 121 total.
    There is already a 3% swing from Labour to Tory since the general election on the new BMG poll for the Independent last night
    Do you have full figures for that poll, because I think it implies an increase for Reform, which doesn't really help the Tories even if it's at the expense of Labour?
    Good morning

    Reform on 19 % (+1) but @HYUFD will respond by saying conservative and reform are on 45% !!!
    Tories also up to 26%
    Given what a miserable August the new Labour government is reputed to have had, I'm not sure a rating of 26% for the Tories is much to celebrate.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,045
    edited August 31
    algarkirk said:

    boulay said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Labour only has to cough to lose its majority.

    The corollary to that is the Tories only need to cough too and they could end up as the third or fourth largest party next time.
    And if they both coughed.
    Prime Minister Sir Ed Davey.
    LotO Farage?

    No, he has too many flaws.

    Wish me luck, I am getting ready to attempt to buy tickets for Oasis.
    Have Oasis reformed? I’m amazed there hasn’t been anything about it on the Today programme this morning like non stop talking about it and Nick Robinson and co- presenter banging on about getting tickets since 7.
    Agree. As 51% of the population (YouGov I think) have no interest in this, it would be fair to suggest that 75%+ of R4 Today audience have none at all.

    They have yet to mention the post modern Marxist ultra cool production of Mozart's Figaro set in a basement full of washing machines I saw at the Edinburgh festival a fornight ago. (I am not making this up). Probably more of the R4 Today audience would find this interesting.

    BTW, who or what is Oasis?
    A popular beat combo very much in hock to another popular beat combo m'lud.

  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,808

    DavidL said:

    What I get from the 2024 election is that the volatility of voting patterns has increased sharply which has brought many more seats into play than was traditionally the case. This really started with the collapse of the red wall in 2019 but hit the Tories big time this time around.

    This seems to me to be a good thing, on the whole. The preponderance of safe seats was unhealthy and made too many of our politicians indifferent to what we actually thought.

    Go back before 2019 - it started with Brexit. "The system" has been failing every larger numbers of people for decades, and the ability of parties to persuade people that it was in their interests to vote for "the system" broke down. Then Cameron blinked and offered people the opportunity to vote against the system, and so they did.

    Where Starmer critics are right (and had you heard me in the pub the weekend before last with Labour councillor friends you would include me as a Starmer critic) is that Labour have run with "change" with no real ambition for what that means or how to go about it.

    Starmer has the Big Picture. Offer hope. Identify big themes and box them off into 5 ills to be cured. Their problem is how that translates into strategies and policies. With a majority of 704 he really could do whatever he wanted to radically shift the overton window and with it the political landscape. And yet there he is off having weaselly bilaterals with France and Germany saying "nothing has changed" with regards to relations with EU/EEA/CU. He's not trying to bypass the huge cost of short-termism by investing now in training and staffing so that we get the public services people need and a significant cost saving.

    No, instead he's planning to kill the hospitality industry and maintain the grindcore poverty brake on the economy which costs more than the solution in both emergency measures and crime.

    I don't get the Starmer programme at all. Which is why I am not "one of us" as my mate drunkenly insisted last week.
    To be fair the Starmer programme is showing signs of being exactly what I expected/feared. Timid third way tinkering, based on an ongoing failure to challenge economic orthodoxy. Starmer fought the election as if it was 1997, completely missing the appetite for more radical change. 2024 is not 1997, the country is in a much worse place after years of upheaval and political failure and our politics are much more fractured. There is room for boldness, but no sign that the leadership understands that.

    And partly this is down to groupthink - whilst making the loony left unwelcome was desirable, he has pushed it too far - running the party in an authoritarian fashion and making no attempt to reconcile with the traditional liberal left, think the Clive Lewis’s of this world, who imho have much to offer. In this era of retail politics that has cost him 5% of the vote and as someone with liberal left leanings, I was delighted that I didn’t feel I had to vote for them.



  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,293
    rcs1000 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Incidentally, I don't think we've covered this:

    https://apnews.com/article/nebraska-abortion-november-election-ballot-measure-513d8bde38f15dee16e9cd216070d704

    Could that possibly get more bizarre?

    The Governor has said he expects the 'enshrine current position' amendment to win, although polling suggests he's being foolish in saying that. But if they both win, just watch the chaos unfold.

    Also surely guarantees that bonus seat for the Dems given the boost it will give to turnout in their target demographics.

    You also wonder what that might do to the Senate races (note plural) although I'll be very surprised if Ricketts doesn't win the special.

    California gets contradictory ballot propositions all the time.

    Voters like to tie politicians hands, bind their feet, and them demand they run sub 10 second 100 meters.
    The second bit isn't unique to California, though they have stronger rope at their disposal.
This discussion has been closed.