Can I crowd source PB for a moment. I'm trying to write a thread, and the scenario is this.
Next year, The Tories win the popular vote, but Ed gets a majority.
What are the implications if a plurality in England voted Tory?
Depends on whether Scotland votes to remain in the Union or not, surely?
I'd guess some Tories will be very noisy in outrage, but with their leadership being torn apart for losing and that most of them would have rejected any attempt to alter the electoral system which resulted in such an outcome, will prevent any consistent reaction. Suddenly the big issue will not be Europe, but an English Parliament (or at least some kind of actual answer to the West Lothian Question). Someone will suggest perhaps the question of electoral reform could come up again, but Labour will be less keen now.
Labour will not react at all - they scraped a win, who cares if they didn't win most votes or have the largest proportion of seats in England, once people see what is good for them that will change eventually, they will assume. Parts of the party will grumble about losing support in England, but with only a slim majority, they won't risk messing with the base that won them that slim majority, and any suggestions to increase English support will be marginal - focusing on the cities and north worked, if only just, no point in risking that for the unknown.
If they haven't already (I do not know), UKIP will make championing a FederalUK their key domestic issue. Even if other parties have already raised it, they will be more successful at it given their rising strength in England.
The Greens may say something, but no-one will notice.
In general, a lot of political wonks will get heated in the first few months, but this just rallies the Labour party behind a PM who would otherwise have been more at the mercy of his backbenchers, as they do not want to risk toppling their own government so soon. There will be a commission or something set up to present some recommendations, which will take 2 years and propose something absurd, ensuring the pro-change side are split, and by that time people will have gotten used to the situation.
Thanks, in my scenarios, it happens regardless of the outcome of the North Britain plebiscite.
I could see Labour getting more seats than the Conservatives, despite fewer votes. But an overall majority, despite fewer votes? Wildly unlikely.
Like you said earlier, I can't see reasons for Labour to be optimistic, on current polling.
Hi all,my computer crashed yesterday and I' m having to use my nearly four yars old iPad; what a bore.Didn'tmiss much, seamingly.
Here's some unsolicited & irrelevant info: This PC is going on 13 yrs old. True, I did have to replace the fan in the power supply, and I upgraded the (working) hard disc from 40 gigs to 120 gigs, but it's still usuable for most things. Transtec. German. You get what you pay for it seems.
That post reminded me of this
www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUl6PooveJE
"Alright, Dave?"
I'm turning into Uncle Albert with this beard that I'm growing.
TSE with a beard? Picture, please. Picture or we don't believe you.
I have a face for radio.
(when I say, a beard, I mean I haven't shaved since last Friday)
That's is not growing a beard that is just idleness, unless you have a chit from the doctor of course.
Maybe we could have a PB beard growing month.
We could coincide it with Movember.
My new avatar... Tuesday morning, the best beard Ive ever managed... Not all that
Conservatives confuse me,(and my Yes voting neighbour). Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit. Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
Conservatives confuse me,(and my Yes voting neighbour). Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit. Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
Are you often confused by simple concepts, such as the concept of the optimal point in a trade-off?
Conservatives confuse me,(and my Yes voting neighbour). Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit. Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
Nothing strange about that. Plenty of people think that the United Kingdom is one nation, and should be independent. And, it isn't just Conservatives who think so.
[To be honest, any one of YES or NO would get my vote if they toned down the hysteria, and gave us the bare facts.]
Ha Ha Smarmy - Now confirmed as an Idiot that can be safely ignored. Just Give Us Some More Info (from both sides) - The crying call of all idiots of Scottish citizenship for years now. Meanwhile - those of that read broadsheets (note - not bbc.co.uk) have been bunkering down for years. And ZOH MY GOD - Did we need bunkering. Yes, we did need bunkering. More Info?? (facts?) Fuck Your Info and Facts. We Need Moar Bunkers.
Conservatives confuse me,(and my Yes voting neighbour). Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit. Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
Scotland and the rest of the UK share a language, a history, similar religious traditions, similar legal traditions, a common culture and mentality. Both are very different to the Germans and the Greeks.
If you put a bunch of international people in a room, ones that were typical of their country - say an Italian, a Scot, an Estonian, a Frenchman, an Australian, a Hungarian, an Englishman and a Canadian - then the Scot and the Englishman would feel more in common with each other than they would would any of the others. Neither would feel closer to the Europeans than they do to the Australian and the Canadian. That says it all.
Conservatives confuse me,(and my Yes voting neighbour). Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit. Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
I don't think it's that confusing. The constituent countries of the UK are regarded as a natural unit that over many centuries has come together as one (albeit not without many hiccups along the way), and while not everyone thinks that is a good thing or should remain, most people would still say the connection between the constituent countries, in the UK or not, is significant and real in historical, personal and emotional ways, whereas the European project is an artificial conjoining of nations without public enthusiasm or historical connections.
Perhaps Europe will become something similar in time, who knows, but the EU's problem is it tries to force it. The joining of much of the UK was by force or coercion, but it was a long time ago and since then the cultural ties have developed to forge genuine connections, whereas the EU tries to make everyone the same as though enforcing shared farming regulations or whatever is a substitute for the power of the idea of the nation-state, an idea that has been the dominant idea in the world for many centuries now (despite much rallying from its arch-rival, religion)
I'm lukewarm not hostile on the European project, but while the arguments can end up sounding similar, I don't think there is a problem with believing in the retention of the UK and the end of the EU.
The City of London is a massive vortex sucking up everything in the land. This is not some evil plot to lay waste to the rest of the country, just a natural fact of capitalism. The only way I can see of ameliorating it (short of the glorious revolution of course) is for a more federalized system throughout Britain, and I am not sure that England is ready for such a step. I know you say that London hands money out to the other regions, but we prefer work to handouts oddly enough.
The City of London is a massive vortex sucking up everything in the land. This is not some evil plot to lay waste to the rest of the country, just a natural fact of capitalism. The only way I can see of ameliorating it (short of the glorious revolution of course) is for a more federalized system throughout Britain, and I am not sure that England is ready for such a step. I know you say that London hands money out to the other regions, but we prefer work to handouts oddly enough.
London provides jobs to the rest of the country too. If a company is headquartered in London over New York, it is more likely to place firm functions in the rest of the UK near to the head office. The financial sector, the creative sector, the professional services sector, the tech sector - all help economic activity throughout the rest of the UK.
Hands up who knows the price of a loaf of bread. Worst criticism ever in politics.
One of them certainly. People buy such things every week and most would still end up giving a vague answer. I don't commit such things to memory, I still need to check the blooming labels when tallying up the total when going round the store, and I think most people do the same, they have a general idea. How much is a pint of milk for example? I don't know - I buy the 4pts which is normally reduced to £1 these days, so if I guessed 25p a pint I'd be right, but probably criticized as out of touch as I imagine a 1pt is a bit more than that on its own.
I would have guessed 90p but I imagine it varies a lot store to store and brand to brand. I agree that its a stupid criticism - I only look at prices in the grocery store when I am comparing two options to get the cheapest, which I'll then promptly forget, or at the overall price of my weekly shop.
Speak for yourself. The real division is class and family background. I have more in common with Greek doctors and Romanian nurses than I do with English plumbers or Scottish shipbuilders.
Conservatives confuse me,(and my Yes voting neighbour). Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit. Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
Scotland and the rest of the UK share a language, a history, similar religious traditions, similar legal traditions, a common culture and mentality. Both are very different to the Germans and the Greeks.
If you put a bunch of international people in a room, ones that were typical of their country - say an Italian, a Scot, an Estonian, a Frenchman, an Australian, a Hungarian, an Englishman and a Canadian - then the Scot and the Englishman would feel more in common with each other than they would would any of the others. Neither would feel closer to the Europeans than they do to the Australian and the Canadian. That says it all.
from last thread... EPP got 6 Vice Presidents due to the deal with S&D to hand EU Parliament Presidency to Schultz. Using de Hondt EPP should have got 5 Vice Presidents and Socialists 4. However because S&D got the presidency, they agreed to go for a 6 to 3 split among vice-presidents. On De Hondt ECR, ALDE, far left, Greens and EFDD should have got one vice president each
However ALDE fielded 2 candidates instead of 1. There were 15 candidates for 14 seats...and Grillo's guy finished last in the final round (2 ALDE, ECR, GUE, Greens and EFDD candidates were left at that stage). Possibly part of the Schultz's deal as ALDE didn't oppose him. However the change in number of EPP/S&D vice presidents didn't affect other parties unlike in this case
Interesting article in the Times today on Ed Miliband's team's hopeless organisation and a quote from an unnamed shadow minister that the only thing worse than a Labour defeat would be a Labour victory as Miliband's government could be so bad it kept the party out for a generation http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4137016.ece
Apparently he was out by 50%, according to the QT questioner.
The price of a loaf can vary by 50% though, a cheap loaf in a BOGOF against a freshly baked olive infused bakery selection. You might be looking at 70p through to £1.50 ?
I'd like to know what Dave actually answered though !
@Socrates Yes, but it's very success gives it greater gravity dragging investments and jobs towards itself. This is just a function of the market, but it's effects are real, and lead in part to the explosive growth in house prices, leading to the need for higher wages to cover this. We can accept that the "City" will be the provider and power for all, or we can try something different.
Speak for yourself. The real division is class and family background. I have more in common with Greek doctors and Romanian nurses than I do with English plumbers or Scottish shipbuilders.
Conservatives confuse me,(and my Yes voting neighbour). Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit. Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
Scotland and the rest of the UK share a language, a history, similar religious traditions, similar legal traditions, a common culture and mentality. Both are very different to the Germans and the Greeks.
If you put a bunch of international people in a room, ones that were typical of their country - say an Italian, a Scot, an Estonian, a Frenchman, an Australian, a Hungarian, an Englishman and a Canadian - then the Scot and the Englishman would feel more in common with each other than they would would any of the others. Neither would feel closer to the Europeans than they do to the Australian and the Canadian. That says it all.
But without shared language and culture you'd probably never get to realize that. I also probably have more in common with someone of a similar class in Romania or whatever, but I'd probably still get along better with some upper class Scottish person, in an instinctive belonging way, whereas it would take time with others. British is my tribe, even if most of that tribe are strangers to me.
The City of London is a massive vortex sucking up everything in the land. This is not some evil plot to lay waste to the rest of the country, just a natural fact of capitalism. The only way I can see of ameliorating it (short of the glorious revolution of course) is for a more federalized system throughout Britain, and I am not sure that England is ready for such a step. I know you say that London hands money out to the other regions, but we prefer work to handouts oddly enough.
Idiot Commie for Yes. Hold the front page. The Glorious Revolution has already happened. You should be having fun.
If Glorious Revolution Part 2 happens you'll be on the wrong side.
*Posts ironic bbc.co.uk Ukraine link if he could be bothered*
@Socrates Yes, but it's very success gives it greater gravity dragging investments and jobs towards itself. This is just a function of the market, but it's effects are real, and lead in part to the explosive growth in house prices, leading to the need for higher wages to cover this. We can accept that the "City" will be the provider and power for all, or we can try something different.
If London becomes so successful its wages increase, that just means London will lose a lot of those jobs to the rest of the country. It's a mistake a lot of people outside London make to assume London = the City. Shoreditch's tech city, the West End's business district, Islington's creative sector etc all mean there's a lot of economic diversity about.
Of course, we should do more for the rest of the UK to do better. Fast rail links between the cities would help other cities benefit from London, and broader urban areas having a single mayor over them, along the London model, would help high profile leaders push through needed initiatives. Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Greater Leeds, Greater Sheffield and Tyneside should all have their own Borises and Kens.
The same thing that happened at the start of the industrial revolution is now happening in the digital age. The difference is that instead of the agricultural workers moving to the cities, they are now moving from the cities to London. Just as in the original revolution, some places will remain, but the heart gets sucked out of them.
I'd like to ask a politically incorrect question: has a white person ever been detained at airport security for attempting to smuggle a bomb onto a plane?
The Tories need to take vote share from Labour not UKIP to be biggest party and need Labour at less than 30% to have a chance of governing alone. I dont see that happening do you?
Well if you put 39 33 8 into the UKPR calculator then you get a tory majority of 4. If Labour slide and libdems stay low then ...? And if the Libdems perform better than their %age in the polls then they hit labour and tories sure, but all that means is they stay in coalition with the tories. Theory of course ... but Labour on 33 does not look good for them, and why should they not slide just 2 from their current average of 35?
The same thing that happened at the start of the industrial revolution is now happening in the digital age. The difference is that instead of the agricultural workers moving to the cities, they are now moving from the cities to London. Just as in the original revolution, some places will remain, but the heart gets sucked out of them.
There isn't enough space in London for everyone to move there, so people will have to move elsewhere. I suspect that the local heart of a lot of places in England have lost more from immigration of foreign cultures into them than they have through a few graduates heading off to London.
@HYUFD That was the point I was making. Not all jobs will be pulled towards London, but the highest paying ones usually are. We can accept this a an irrefutable fact, or try something different, and it will have to be different, as many things have been tried before and failed. Edit: @Socratese as well
Interesting article in the Times today on Ed Miliband's team's hopeless organisation and a quote from an unnamed shadow minister that the only thing worse than a Labour defeat would be a Labour victory as Miliband's government could be so bad it kept the party out for a generation http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4137016.ece
It might well be true that he / they would be utterly useless, but they said that about after Brown government (and it was certainly true that it didn't function) but here we are with less than a year to go and it looks like Labour will more than likely be handed the keys back to #10 (and very worst it being another hung parliament).
Can I crowd source PB for a moment. I'm trying to write a thread, and the scenario is this.
Next year, The Tories win the popular vote, but Ed gets a majority.
What are the implications if a plurality in England voted Tory?
The same as in 1951 when it was the reverse and 1974 when it was the same as your scenario. People mutter "tsk, I wonder if we should change the electoral system, oh maybe not" and accept it.
Can I crowd source PB for a moment. I'm trying to write a thread, and the scenario is this.
Next year, The Tories win the popular vote, but Ed gets a majority.
What are the implications if a plurality in England voted Tory?
Depends on whether Scotland votes to remain in the Union or not, surely?
I'd guess some Tories will be very noisy in outrage, but with their leadership being torn apart for losing and that most of them would have rejected any attempt to alter the electoral system which resulted in such an outcome, will prevent any consistent reaction. Suddenly the big issue will not be Europe, but an English Parliament (or at least some kind of actual answer to the West Lothian Question). Someone will suggest perhaps the question of electoral reform could come up again, but Labour will be less keen now.
Labour will not react at all - they scraped a win, who cares if they didn't win most votes or have the largest proportion of seats in England, once people see what is good for them that will change eventually, they will assume. Parts of the party will grumble about losing support in England, but with only a slim majority, they won't risk messing with the base that won them that slim majority, and any suggestions to increase English support will be marginal - focusing on the cities and north worked, if only just, no point in risking that for the unknown.
If they haven't already (I do not know), UKIP will make championing a FederalUK their key domestic issue. Even if other parties have already raised it, they will be more successful at it given their rising strength in England.
The Greens may say something, but no-one will notice.
In general, a lot of political wonks will get heated in the first few months, but this just rallies the Labour party behind a PM who would otherwise have been more at the mercy of his backbenchers, as they do not want to risk toppling their own government so soon. There will be a commission or something set up to present some recommendations, which will take 2 years and propose something absurd, ensuring the pro-change side are split, and by that time people will have gotten used to the situation.
Thanks, in my scenarios, it happens regardless of the outcome of the North Britain plebiscite.
In the event of a Yes vote, expect the wailing from the Tories to last an additional 6 months.
Comments
(Armenian proverb)
Like you said earlier, I can't see reasons for Labour to be optimistic, on current polling.
Scotland should remain in the UK because being part of a bigger unit brings advantages, But Britain should leave Europe, because we need to make our own decisions for our benefit.
Not all of them hold both these views, but a great many do.
Where can we find our favourite Loony?
To be honest, any one of YES or NO would get my vote if they toned down the hysteria, and gave us the bare facts.
I am not optimistic of that though.
Ha Ha Smarmy - Now confirmed as an Idiot that can be safely ignored. Just Give Us Some More Info (from both sides) - The crying call of all idiots of Scottish citizenship for years now. Meanwhile - those of that read broadsheets (note - not bbc.co.uk) have been bunkering down for years. And ZOH MY GOD - Did we need bunkering. Yes, we did need bunkering. More Info?? (facts?) Fuck Your Info and Facts. We Need Moar Bunkers.
PS - Is Sarah Smith Scottish?
Less people I say !
If you put a bunch of international people in a room, ones that were typical of their country - say an Italian, a Scot, an Estonian, a Frenchman, an Australian, a Hungarian, an Englishman and a Canadian - then the Scot and the Englishman would feel more in common with each other than they would would any of the others. Neither would feel closer to the Europeans than they do to the Australian and the Canadian. That says it all.
Perhaps Europe will become something similar in time, who knows, but the EU's problem is it tries to force it. The joining of much of the UK was by force or coercion, but it was a long time ago and since then the cultural ties have developed to forge genuine connections, whereas the EU tries to make everyone the same as though enforcing shared farming regulations or whatever is a substitute for the power of the idea of the nation-state, an idea that has been the dominant idea in the world for many centuries now (despite much rallying from its arch-rival, religion)
I'm lukewarm not hostile on the European project, but while the arguments can end up sounding similar, I don't think there is a problem with believing in the retention of the UK and the end of the EU.
The City of London is a massive vortex sucking up everything in the land. This is not some evil plot to lay waste to the rest of the country, just a natural fact of capitalism.
The only way I can see of ameliorating it (short of the glorious revolution of course) is for a more federalized system throughout Britain, and I am not sure that England is ready for such a step.
I know you say that London hands money out to the other regions, but we prefer work to handouts oddly enough.
80p for pre-packed wholemeal/white loaves.
ab 857 Con 629 UKIP 129 LD 127 Green 90 Pat Soc 2
Lab hold
Northampton, St. James
Lab 307 Lib Dem 262 UKIP 201 Con 198
Lab hold
That's a politicians answer, but it's true.
Seven eights are 56 too, and Worcester is err Worcester !
http://www.parentdish.co.uk/2014/07/03/george-osborne-refuses-to-answer-childs-times-table-question-video/?icid=maing-grid7|uk|dl17|sec1_lnk2&pLid=276166#!slide=aol_2628838
from last thread...
EPP got 6 Vice Presidents due to the deal with S&D to hand EU Parliament Presidency to Schultz. Using de Hondt EPP should have got 5 Vice Presidents and Socialists 4. However because S&D got the presidency, they agreed to go for a 6 to 3 split among vice-presidents. On De Hondt ECR, ALDE, far left, Greens and EFDD should have got one vice president each
However ALDE fielded 2 candidates instead of 1. There were 15 candidates for 14 seats...and Grillo's guy finished last in the final round (2 ALDE, ECR, GUE, Greens and EFDD candidates were left at that stage).
Possibly part of the Schultz's deal as ALDE didn't oppose him. However the change in number of EPP/S&D vice presidents didn't affect other parties unlike in this case
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4137016.ece
I'd like to know what Dave actually answered though !
Yes, but it's very success gives it greater gravity dragging investments and jobs towards itself.
This is just a function of the market, but it's effects are real, and lead in part to the explosive growth in house prices, leading to the need for higher wages to cover this.
We can accept that the "City" will be the provider and power for all, or we can try something different.
43p out of Aldi's for 800 grams, if you can stomach eating soggy cardboard.
I am kidding. Slightly. But without shared language and culture you'd probably never get to realize that. I also probably have more in common with someone of a similar class in Romania or whatever, but I'd probably still get along better with some upper class Scottish person, in an instinctive belonging way, whereas it would take time with others. British is my tribe, even if most of that tribe are strangers to me.
Night all.
If Glorious Revolution Part 2 happens you'll be on the wrong side.
*Posts ironic bbc.co.uk Ukraine link if he could be bothered*
A well made rebuttal and considered argument sir.
Of course, we should do more for the rest of the UK to do better. Fast rail links between the cities would help other cities benefit from London, and broader urban areas having a single mayor over them, along the London model, would help high profile leaders push through needed initiatives. Greater Manchester, Merseyside, Greater Leeds, Greater Sheffield and Tyneside should all have their own Borises and Kens.
The same thing that happened at the start of the industrial revolution is now happening in the digital age.
The difference is that instead of the agricultural workers moving to the cities, they are now moving from the cities to London.
Just as in the original revolution, some places will remain, but the heart gets sucked out of them.
#BritainElects @britainelects · 46m
St James (Northampton) result: LAB - 31.7% (-2.9) LDEM - 27.1% (+9.9) UKIP - 20.8% (+20.8) CON - 20.5% (-11.4)
#BritainElects @britainelects · 41m
Wivenhoe Quay (Colchester) result: LAB: 46.7% (-5.4) CON: 34.3% (+2.4) UKIP: 7.0% (+7.0) LDEM: 6.9% (-0.1) GRN: 4.9% (-4.2) PATSOC: 0.1%
#BritainElects @britainelects · 9m
Charlton Park (Cheltenham) result: LDEM - 45.9% (+13.3) CON - 40.9% (-26.5) UKIP - 8.2% (+8.2) GRN - 2.5% (+2.5) LAB - 2.5% (+2.5)
#BritainElects @britainelects · 49s
Braunston & Crick (Northamptonshire) result: CON - 40.5% (+6.5) LAB - 39.3% (+9.5) UKIP - 20.1% (-11.3)
And if the Libdems perform better than their %age in the polls then they hit labour and tories sure, but all that means is they stay in coalition with the tories.
Theory of course ... but Labour on 33 does not look good for them, and why should they not slide just 2 from their current average of 35?
"sean thomas knox @thomasknox · 7h
Fuck. Just encountered hideous car/bike crash in Delancey St. Biker dead, maybe driver too. Carpe fucking diem, Twitter, Carpe Diem."
https://twitter.com/thomasknox
That was the point I was making. Not all jobs will be pulled towards London, but the highest paying ones usually are.
We can accept this a an irrefutable fact, or try something different, and it will have to be different, as many things have been tried before and failed.
Edit: @Socratese as well
Night
#BritainElects @britainelects · 17m
Old Laund Booth (Pendle) result: LDEM - 58.3% (+9.8) CON - 36.3% (-10.9) UKIP - 3.7% (+3.7) BLUE - 1.8% (+1.8)
#BritainElects @britainelects · 8m
Brixworth (Northamptonshire) result: CON - 55.4% (+4.4) UKIP - 21.3% (+14.7) LAB - 10.6% (-2.6) GRN - 9.7% (+5.7) LDEM - 2.9% (-22.1)
Didn't that happen in 2005? (and Scotland in 1979, 1983, 1987, 1992,2010 etc etc).
The answer is simple, nothing.