Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
In England the Con + UKIP figure was 55%. Still 51% with Scotland and Wales as I said earlier.
People keep repeating this to give the 37% Government some legitimacy. I don't think it is remotely true. Kippers took as many (if not more) from Labour as from Tory and I don't think there were any significant number of Kippers voting for UKIP to get continued Austerity.
It's a completely bogus argument.
The problem is left-wingers kept saying the Thatcher government wasn't legitimate because you could add together the Labour and Alliance shares to get more than 50%. The "progressive majority" as it was called.
Even more funny given that people like Dair were saying UKIP were a right wing party before the election and now that they don't like the percentages they are trying to claim they are not right wing after all.
They are a right wing race hate party. Unsurprisingly that means they get at least half their vote from previous Labour voters. Race Hate trumps left vs right.
Dair I have seen you spew more bigoted hatred on here than any UKIP poster. You also seem to revel in your own ignorance so I would suggest you take a long hard look at yourself before accusing others of the traits you show in such excess.
Quite amusing the liberal left behave like fascists and then have the cheek to accuse others of being fascists.
Suprised Dair isn't in London with his non-fascist peaceful comrades:
Something for the people demonstrating in Whitehall to consider:
In Great Britain the combined Conservative and UKIP share was 50.66%, 15,188,670 votes out of a total of 29,980,107.
One thing that hasn't been discussed much in the media is that turnout only increased by 1%. It looks like a lot of potential Labour voters didn't bother to vote.
Given the changes to registration, as well as the increase north of the border, a 1% increase probably masks a real decrease. Does anyone have the raw figures yet?
Which raw figures are you talking about? The total electorate this time was 46,425,386:
''Look Nigel, we love you but...'' Hilarious. Poor Nigel. Here he is, the leader of a party that is supposed to be the one that will break the mould, will solve the problems of those who 'love him'. They know he is going to resign if he loses, he must be the most important person in their universe. Whither UKIP without him? But vote for him? 'Sorry Nigel but...'
Cameron must have been terribly confused this evening. Not how did he end up wining a majority and now how the hell is he going to implement lots of fake pledges in the manifesto, which he was going to throw away as price of Coalition II....
no it was that Aston Ham vs West Villa United on MOTD.
That last graphic is intersting. The actual numbers produced by the Electoral Reform Society showed that the Tories would have 258 seats and UKIP 83. Yet the graphic clearly shows the Tories on less than 250.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
Back of the envelope says they need something like a 7% swing for a majority, historically unlikely.
But anything less is a hung parliament, with the spectre of the Nats at the table, just like last week. The South and Midlands, as we saw, just won't wear that.
Labour's best hope must be for an independent Scotland, with them taken out of the equation completely...
But that takes 50 or so seats out the equation that will never vote for a Tory QS. Labour has long term problems in Wales. And England is a HUGE ask for Labour.
They are screwed.
I expect a new Lib-Lab rapprochement, with PR suddenly back on the agenda!
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
Back of the envelope says they need something like a 7% swing for a majority, historically unlikely.
But anything less is a hung parliament, with the spectre of the Nats at the table, just like last week. The South and Midlands, as we saw, just won't wear that.
Labour's best hope must be for an independent Scotland, with them taken out of the equation completely...
Who would have ever imagined that previously?
Congratulations Blair. His attempted gerrymandering has instead become a self inflicted amputation of one of Labour's legs.
Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
IMO focusing so strongly on ethnicity is one of the problems for the left in the UK today. Voters in Middle England don't have a problem voting for people who happen to be from an ethnic minority like Sajid Javid and Nadhim Zahawi but they don't like it being a big issue.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
Back of the envelope says they need something like a 7% swing for a majority, historically unlikely.
But anything less is a hung parliament, with the spectre of the Nats at the table, just like last week. The South and Midlands, as we saw, just won't wear that.
Labour's best hope must be for an independent Scotland, with them taken out of the equation completely...
But that takes 50 or so seats out the equation that will never vote for a Tory QS. Labour has long term problems in Wales. And England is a HUGE ask for Labour.
They are screwed.
I expect a new Lib-Lab rapprochement, with PR suddenly back on the agenda!
But PR is not on the agenda of the governing party, so it won't happen (before 2020 anyway).
Something for the people demonstrating in Whitehall to consider:
In Great Britain the combined Conservative and UKIP share was 50.66%, 15,188,670 votes out of a total of 29,980,107.
One thing that hasn't been discussed much in the media is that turnout only increased by 1%. It looks like a lot of potential Labour voters didn't bother to vote.
Given the changes to registration, as well as the increase north of the border, a 1% increase probably masks a real decrease. Does anyone have the raw figures yet?
Which raw figures are you talking about? The total electorate this time was 46,425,386:
If the boundary changes go ahead, could the Lib Dems lose all their seats except perhaps Westmorland ? (Orkney on a knife edge)
They might anyway.
It will be interesting to see how seriously they are treated by the media after receiving nearly one and a half million votes less than UKIP. It's not like the DUP normally get much media time with their 8 MPs, and I'd be surprised if their leader went back to having a guaranteed set of questions at PMQs as the Lib Dems used to get prior to 2010.
One presumes that the SNP are going to get a lot of time in the London media, and the Lib Dems will be well down the pecking order.
Its going to be boring listening to Salmond's regular 2 sets of questions. It will be funny though listening to Tristram waffling on about posh boys who don't know about the real world.
ISAM Well even on the figures of voters there are still 1.2 million more ethnic minority voters than UKIP voters, if more of the 8 million can be persuaded to vote for the UK's first ethnic minority PM that figure would rise further
Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
IMO focusing so strongly on ethnicity is one of the problems for the left in the UK today. Voters in Middle England don't have a problem voting for people who happen to be from an ethnic minority like Sajid Javid and Nadhim Zahawi but they don't like it being a big issue.
Exactly
That's why I wouldn't vote for abbot or khan but would vote for Patel and kwasi
Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
Labour seem to be completely incapable of looking beyond the colour of someone's skin.
I know a huge number of people who are left leaning and BME but voted Tory due to how anti aspiration and business the Labour party are perceived as being.
Why, he was as guilty as the Tories for the racist lies about Scotland. He repeated anti-Scottish rhetoric on an hourly basis. If I cost him a seat, good. In reality he just didn't get the votes he needed. He was a failure.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
Back of the envelope says they need something like a 7% swing for a majority, historically unlikely.
But anything less is a hung parliament, with the spectre of the Nats at the table, just like last week. The South and Midlands, as we saw, just won't wear that.
Labour's best hope must be for an independent Scotland, with them taken out of the equation completely...
I think Labour's problem is deeper than that.
The whole left wing 'working people' nonsense and particularly the association with the unions is way past its sell by date. They need to stop the 'Labour Movement' stuff and just be a political party. As long as they are in hock to the unions they can never change.
Labour needs to take a hard look at what it has to offer in today's economy. Everybody seems to have worked out that the best unemployment benifit is a JOB, so they need to come up with pro-business policies that appeal to aspirational middle class folks who want to earn some good money and better themselves.
You can't do that with 'soak the rich', destroying pensions and lefty policies.
''Look Nigel, we love you but...'' Hilarious. Poor Nigel. Here he is, the leader of a party that is supposed to be the one that will break the mould, will solve the problems of those who 'love him'. They know he is going to resign if he loses, he must be the most important person in their universe. Whither UKIP without him? But vote for him? 'Sorry Nigel but...'
Yes he is a sorry Nigel all right.
Sorry could you retype that post in a format which does not come across as incoherent rambling.
I think you're right that turnout as a proportion of the entire adult population probably declined, because — as we all know — the population of the country has been growing rapidly over the last five years, and so you'd have expected the total number of votes to have increased by more than it did if turnout was remaining the same. But a lot of that new population won't be on the electoral register for obvious reasons.
Something for the people demonstrating in Whitehall to consider:
In Great Britain the combined Conservative and UKIP share was 50.66%, 15,188,670 votes out of a total of 29,980,107.
One thing that hasn't been discussed much in the media is that turnout only increased by 1%. It looks like a lot of potential Labour voters didn't bother to vote.
Given the changes to registration, as well as the increase north of the border, a 1% increase probably masks a real decrease. Does anyone have the raw figures yet?
Which raw figures are you talking about? The total electorate this time was 46,425,386:
AndyJS The suburban middle class will vote for a leader who is moderate and reasonable, however the left does need to learn from Obama's ability to maximise and turn out the growing ethnic minority vote
I'm not sure what happened in Peterborough. If Labour activists starting booing Jackson before he'd even begun making his speech I can understand him being annoyed, when he'd been elected a few seconds before.
Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
IMO focusing so strongly on ethnicity is one of the problems for the left in the UK today. Voters in Middle England don't have a problem voting for people who happen to be from an ethnic minority like Sajid Javid but they don't like it being a big issue.
Also BME peoples are becoming increasingly like other Brits in how they vote, particularly Sikhs and Hindus as well as Black Africans. Muslims less so. I have several asian colleagues who voted kipper.
Labour built up a strong following in BME groups by interpreting the world through the prism of class, and of anti-imperialist sympathies. The flawed concept of multiculturism came later.
Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
IMO focusing so strongly on ethnicity is one of the problems for the left in the UK today. Voters in Middle England don't have a problem voting for people who happen to be from an ethnic minority like Sajid Javid but they don't like it being a big issue.
Also BME peoples are becoming increasingly like other Brits in how they vote, particularly Sikhs and Hindus as well as Black Africans. Muslims less so. I have several asian colleagues who voted kipper.
Labour built up a strong following in BME groups by interpreting the world through the prism of class, and of anti-imperialist sympathies. The flawed concept of multiculturism came later.
The Tories must have done very well with Hindu voters in the Harrow constituencies.
Sandpit Complete crap, Labour has its base of ethnic minority and public sector workers which would only increase under an Umunna leadership, post a close EU referendum it is the Tories who will worry about losing voters to UKIP. But as I said the white working class is in relative decline, there is no future in being UKIP lite for Labour, they will not beat the real thing, to win they have to win back the educated, relatively prosperous suburban middle class who backed Blair and Obama in the US
I don't think Labour would win one single extra vote from Ethnic Minorities if Umunna was the leader. A few Liberals , who still voted Liberal, might come over. But that's about it.
We need a leader from Middle Britain. Why can't we have another Harold Wilson ? Much criticised while leader even by members of the Labour party, yet won 4 elections.
Why can't you have another Harold Wilson? Well first you need to find someone with... wait for it... Brains. he was an Oxford Don at 21. Wilson studied PPE by the way...
- and always seemed to wear Gannex coats
And smoked a pipe in public and a cigar in private. A good definition of socialism for me.
ISAM Well even on the figures of voters there are still 1.2 million more ethnic minority voters than UKIP voters, if more of the 8 million can be persuaded to vote for the UK's first ethnic minority PM that figure would rise further
Why are you even bothering boring on about this? I couldn't care less and it is rather narrow minded and old fashioned to assume that ethnic minorities are going to vote for someone just because they share skin colour anyway
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
In England the Con + UKIP figure was 55%. Still 51% with Scotland and Wales as I said earlier.
People keep repeating this to give the 37% Government some legitimacy. I don't think it is remotely true. Kippers took as many (if not more) from Labour as from Tory and I don't think there were any significant number of Kippers voting for UKIP to get continued Austerity.
It's a completely bogus argument.
The problem is left-wingers kept saying the Thatcher government wasn't legitimate because you could add together the Labour and Alliance shares to get more than 50%. The "progressive majority" as it was called.
Even more funny given that people like Dair were saying UKIP were a right wing party before the election and now that they don't like the percentages they are trying to claim they are not right wing after all.
They are a right wing race hate party. Unsurprisingly that means they get at least half their vote from previous Labour voters. Race Hate trumps left vs right.
Dair I have seen you spew more bigoted hatred on here than any UKIP poster. You also seem to revel in your own ignorance so I would suggest you take a long hard look at yourself before accusing others of the traits you show in such excess.
I'm happy with how I look in the mirror. And very happy at friends from Europe coming to Scotland and joining out community. Not so happy about race hate preachers like Farage being married to one of the people he preaches against. I'd rather people coming to Scotland were involved and part of our society. Like the EU immigrant to Scotland who is an SNP MSP.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
Back of the envelope says they need something like a 7% swing for a majority, historically unlikely.
But anything less is a hung parliament, with the spectre of the Nats at the table, just like last week. The South and Midlands, as we saw, just won't wear that.
Labour's best hope must be for an independent Scotland, with them taken out of the equation completely...
Labour isn't going to get the numbers of seat's they need in one election to be able to form the government.
They must prepare for a ten year recovery with 2020 all about reversing the damage that has been inflicted on them in 2010 and 2015, then the possibility if there of a push towards government in 2025.
Of course if the Lib-Dems hadn't been wiped out there might have been the chance of a Lab/Lib-Dem coalition in 2020, but the Lib-Dems will be in recovery mode next time as well, so that makes a Lab/Lib coalition highly unlikely.
I think we've got another decade of Conservative rule and Labour out of power for 15 years minimum.
I repeat - the SNP would not get any seats as they would not get above the 5% barrier.
In any event how can a proportional system not take into account the 34% who did not vote?
In a proportional system using geographical areas, simply have 34% of the seats left vacant. Then areas with higher turnout would get more say in parliament.
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
No one knows what 5 years will hold. I remember people saying Labour would never win again in 1992.
If the boundaries are based on those registered to vote at the election, the seat distribution will be as follows: England: 502 (-31) Wales: 29 (-11) Scotland: 53 (-6) Northern Ireland: 16 (-2) Given the massive reduction in seats in Wales and Isle of Wight fix (para 6(1) of schedule 2 to the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986), the changes are still likely to benefit the Conservatives.
You didn't get my point. The law also says the seats will be averaged. Many of the larger seats are now Labour. East Ham, for example.
Is the 600 seat Parliament actually law ? I thought the LDs didn't vote for that.
TA David Miliband was born and brought up in London just like his brother
Nonetheless he was an essentially Blairite candidate who would have likely focused on Middle England, something his brother didn't have in mind.
Tbh, I've never been convinced David Miliband was a Blairite true believer, rather than someone closer to Tony than to Gordon. But he'd have faced the same personal abuse from the Tory press about being weird, from north London, and speaking in pseudo-academic policy wonk-ese. They'd probably have said the same things about his father, as well.
Why, he was as guilty as the Tories for the racist lies about Scotland. He repeated anti-Scottish rhetoric on an hourly basis. If I cost him a seat, good. In reality he just didn't get the votes he needed. He was a failure.
You can't really blame people when Alex Salmond was going around saying the SNP would be writing Labour's budget. Hopefully they get FFA and can look on as they squirm.
Sandpit Complete crap, Labour has its base of ethnic minority and public sector workers which would only increase under an Umunna leadership, post a close EU referendum it is the Tories who will worry about losing voters to UKIP. But as I said the white working class is in relative decline, there is no future in being UKIP lite for Labour, they will not beat the real thing, to win they have to win back the educated, relatively prosperous suburban middle class who backed Blair and Obama in the US
I don't think Labour would win one single extra vote from Ethnic Minorities if Umunna was the leader. A few Liberals , who still voted Liberal, might come over. But that's about it.
We need a leader from Middle Britain. Why can't we have another Harold Wilson ? Much criticised while leader even by members of the Labour party, yet won 4 elections.
Why can't you have another Harold Wilson? Well first you need to find someone with... wait for it... Brains. he was an Oxford Don at 21. Wilson studied PPE by the way...
- and always seemed to wear Gannex coats
And smoked a pipe in public and a cigar in private. A good definition of socialism for me.
It is thanks to Harold Wilson I know where the Scilly Isles are.
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
No one knows what 5 years will hold. I remember people saying Labour would never win again in 1992.
I remember people saying the Tories might not win a majority for a generation, after 1997.
And, as it turned out, they were completely right.
Nationalist Scotland (and now UKIP and potentially PC) represent an existential threat to Labour, like nothing your party has seen before. Ignoring this truth is utterly stupid.
Saying it's too early to write anything off does not imply anything is ignored.
Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
IMO focusing so strongly on ethnicity is one of the problems for the left in the UK today. Voters in Middle England don't have a problem voting for people who happen to be from an ethnic minority like Sajid Javid and Nadhim Zahawi but they don't like it being a big issue.
I was just in a Wetherspoons in Angel, Islington (not my normal drinking estab, but the GF likes her cheap Sailor Jerrys). What struck me was how casually, automatically, unthinkingly multiracial it was - black, brown, white, and Polish, English, Spanish, with not even a hint of awareness of racial difference. Just everyone drinking, dancing and snogging (such is modern Britain, or at least London).
And yet there was an elephant not in the room. Islam.
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
Mary Creagh could be a far better candidate than Cooper.
GIN1138 Labour needs about a 4% swing to be largest party and a Farron led LDs could perfectly well get at least 25-30 seats and win back some marginals lost to the Tories in the South West. The EU referendum will also shift the Tories right and into division vacating the centre, especially if it is a narrow In
I repeat - the SNP would not get any seats as they would not get above the 5% barrier.
In any event how can a proportional system not take into account the 34% who did not vote?
What 5% threshold?
I'm sure many countries have found a way of not taking account of non-voters. Probably they threaten them with having to read some of the nonsense objections to PR on pb.com and such people decide that voting is preferable.
ISAM Well even on the figures of voters there are still 1.2 million more ethnic minority voters than UKIP voters, if more of the 8 million can be persuaded to vote for the UK's first ethnic minority PM that figure would rise further
Why are you even bothering boring on about this? I couldn't care less and it is rather narrow minded and old fashioned to assume that ethnic minorities are going to vote for someone just because they share skin colour anyway
Lets not forget Ed Miliband presuming the Sikh vote will be backing Labour.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
Back of the envelope says they need something like a 7% swing for a majority, historically unlikely.
But anything less is a hung parliament, with the spectre of the Nats at the table, just like last week. The South and Midlands, as we saw, just won't wear that.
Labour's best hope must be for an independent Scotland, with them taken out of the equation completely...
I think Labour's problem is deeper than that.
The whole left wing 'working people' nonsense and particularly the association with the unions is way past its sell by date. They need to stop the 'Labour Movement' stuff and just be a political party. As long as they are in hock to the unions they can never change.
Labour needs to take a hard look at what it has to offer in today's economy. Everybody seems to have worked out that the best unemployment benifit is a JOB, so they need to come up with pro-business policies that appeal to aspirational middle class folks who want to earn some good money and better themselves.
You can't do that with 'soak the rich', destroying pensions and lefty policies.
The public sector and private sector unions are increasingly divergent. One reason that unemployment did not rise much this recession is that private sector unions cooperated with wage restraint, reduced hours and even zero hours contracts. It is much easier to reverse all of these than to retrain someone who has been on the dole six months. The contrast with the countries of continental Europe is marked.
Fox MP SE But as Obama showed an ethnic leader does get more ethnic minority voters to vote for him. Had Obama been white then the 2008 coalition he won would not have been the same. Umunna also built relations with business as Shadow Business Sec
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
Mary Creagh could be a far better candidate than Cooper.
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
No one knows what 5 years will hold. I remember people saying Labour would never win again in 1992.
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
No one knows what 5 years will hold. I remember people saying Labour would never win again in 1992.
Labour will win again, of course, but it won't be in 2020. They won't be able to gain the numbers of seats they need in one election.
I think we're now looking at a long run of Con government (15 years) probably followed by a long run of Lab government...
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
No one knows what 5 years will hold. I remember people saying Labour would never win again in 1992.
Labour will win again, of course, but it won't be in 2020. They won't be able to gain the numbers of seats they need in one election.
I think we're now looking at a long run of Con government (15 years) probably followed by a long run of Lab government...
Problem for Labour, as I've outlined, is essentially
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
No one knows what 5 years will hold. I remember people saying Labour would never win again in 1992.
Labour will win again, of course, but it won't be in 2020. They won't be able to gain the numbers of seats they need in one election.
I think we're now looking at a long run of Con government (15 years) probably followed by a long run of Lab government of course.
In 2005 Cons had 198 seats to Labs 356. Five years later they were in govt. Who knows whats going to happen this time, but to say a return to govt is impossible is just plain wrong. It can be done.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
...
Labour isn't going to get the numbers of seat's they need in one election to be able to form the government.
They must prepare for a ten year recovery with 2020 all about reversing the damage that has been inflicted on them in 2010 and 2015, then the possibility if there of a push towards government in 2025.
Of course if the Lib-Dems hadn't been wiped out there might have been the chance of a Lab/Lib-Dem coalition in 2020, but the Lib-Dems will be in recovery mode next time as well, so that makes a Lab/Lib coalition highly unlikely.
I think we've got another decade of Conservative rule and Labour out of power for 15 years minimum.
'Where do labour go from here?' I fear this is going to become boring.
In 2005 Labour won 355 seats. After 2015 they have 232. They are 100 behind the Tories. Bad enough though not impossible. However we should remember that 'before' the 2005 election Labour were defending 403 seats. In 1997 they won 418 seats leaving the Tories with just 165. Frankly 232 is a lot better than 165.
What Labour are lacking is not numbers but leaders.
TA David Miliband was born and brought up in London just like his brother
Nonetheless he was an essentially Blairite candidate who would have likely focused on Middle England, something his brother didn't have in mind.
Tbh, I've never been convinced David Miliband was a Blairite true believer, rather than someone closer to Tony than to Gordon. But he'd have faced the same personal abuse from the Tory press about being weird, from north London, and speaking in pseudo-academic policy wonk-ese. They'd probably have said the same things about his father, as well.
Hmmm - I think David Miliband came across far less - 'weird' and more at ease with himself than Ed Miliband. He probably wouldn't have pursued a 35% strategy, and most likely would have accepted the consensus on where he centre ground is, rather than thinking it shifted leftwards. I also don't think David Miliband would have as outspoken against Murdoch, and been so keen to implement the Leverson recommendations, or adopted Miliband's tax polices - which would have meant a large part of the press wouldn't have been so against him as they were Ed Miliband. And on his father, I think it's clear that while Ed was considered centre-left (which is practically a Marxist to the Daily Mail) David was more to the right of the party.
Sorry if already posted but what do people think about Dan Jarvis MP as Labour's next leader? A former Parachute Regiment Commander,single father for a time after his wife died of cancer, Barnsley MP, not associated with divisions of Blair-left etc
Fox But as Obama showed an ethnic leader does get more ethnic minority voters to vote for them
In America, yes. But British BME groups are more diverse than Afro-Americans and Hispanics. British asians rightly often do not identify with Black Africans. Indeed many Leicester Asians fled here as refugees from persecution by Black Africans and feel closer afinity with British values than those of their persecutors.
Chasing votes with identity politics is the way to splinter the country rather than unite it. It is far better to engage with these communities on the same issues as ethnic Britons: Jobs, schools, housing, university fees, health care etc.
The Apocalypse Class has declined as a voting factor, last week Labour won more votes in prosperous the Wirral, Chester and Hove than it did in working class Rugby, Romford and Chatham. BME do, on average, tend to vote more Labour than Tory
As an ethnic minority, I personally don't know any BMEs running their droves to the Conservatives/UKIP. But there you go.
Wow. Are you personally "an ethnic minority"? All by yourself? Impressive.
I guess I might be the only thriller writing Cornish sex memoirist with a prison record and a recent movie deal, but I don't put it on the census form.
BIB: I didn't mean that I constituted all BMEs in the UK, merely that I was one of them - but nevermind.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
...
Labour isn't going to get the numbers of seat's they need in one election to be able to form the government.
They must prepare for a ten year recovery with 2020 all about reversing the damage that has been inflicted on them in 2010 and 2015, then the possibility if there of a push towards government in 2025.
Of course if the Lib-Dems hadn't been wiped out there might have been the chance of a Lab/Lib-Dem coalition in 2020, but the Lib-Dems will be in recovery mode next time as well, so that makes a Lab/Lib coalition highly unlikely.
I think we've got another decade of Conservative rule and Labour out of power for 15 years minimum.
'Where do labour go from here?' I fear this is going to become boring.
In 2005 Labour won 355 seats. After 2015 they have 232. They are 100 behind the Tories. Bad enough though not impossible. However we should remember that 'before' the 2005 election Labour were defending 403 seats. In 1997 they won 418 seats leaving the Tories with just 165. Frankly 232 is a lot better than 165.
What Labour are lacking is not numbers but leaders.
You forget the SNP, and the nightmare for Labour I have outlined.
I'm very reluctant, past and current examples being borne in mind, to suggest that a party can never again achieve something under a FPTP electoral system. Hurdles and obstacles can be created, but given the right set of circumstances, I don't think its possible to ever rule out large parties gaining pluralities and majorities in future.
Look at what was said about Labour in 1992 and the Tories post 1997, as has been mentioned here. Further afield, look at Canada where for ages it looked very, very difficult for the Tories to win a majority government, which they did at the last election. Even India, which has a party system and regional politics that frankly makes ours look exceptionally simple and straightforward, just elected its first majority government in 30 years. Sure, the circumstances need to be there to allow parties to succeed, but to absolutely rule things out occuring under FPTP now looks fairly shortsighted as far as Im concerned.
Sorry if already posted but what do people think about Dan Jarvis MP as Labour's next leader? A former Parachute Regiment Commander,single father for a time after his wife died of cancer, Barnsley MP, not associated with divisions of Blair-left etc
Sorry if already posted but what do people think about Dan Jarvis MP as Labour's next leader? A former Parachute Regiment Commander,single father for a time after his wife died of cancer, Barnsley MP, not associated with divisions of Blair-left etc
Fox MP SE But as Obama showed an ethnic leader does get more ethnic minority voters to vote for him. Had Obama been white then the 2008 coalition he won would not have been the same. Umunna also built relations with business as Shadow Business Sec
Totally different situations
The USA is only 77.7% white and 13% specifically are black. The UK is 87% white and 3% specifically are black
U.S. Turnout is only 60% and much lower in the minorities. The UK turnout is higher at 67%
As an ethnic minority, I personally don't know any BMEs running their droves to the Conservatives/UKIP. But there you go.
Oh yes I forgot you speak for everyone that shares a characteristic with you.
What are people that take your shoe size watching on telly at the moment generally?
I never said I did - I was simply providing a different anecdotal evidence to one PBers were.
To give you your dues I doubt there are many 20 yr old female BAME lefty warriors that spend their Saturday nights talking politics online with men two or three times her age so you are quite unique
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
...
Labour isn't going to get the numbers of seat's they need in one election to be able to form the government.
They must prepare for a ten year recovery with 2020 all about reversing the damage that has been inflicted on them in 2010 and 2015, then the possibility if there of a push towards government in 2025.
Of course if the Lib-Dems hadn't been wiped out there might have been the chance of a Lab/Lib-Dem coalition in 2020, but the Lib-Dems will be in recovery mode next time as well, so that makes a Lab/Lib coalition highly unlikely.
I think we've got another decade of Conservative rule and Labour out of power for 15 years minimum.
'Where do labour go from here?' I fear this is going to become boring.
In 2005 Labour won 355 seats. After 2015 they have 232. They are 100 behind the Tories. Bad enough though not impossible. However we should remember that 'before' the 2005 election Labour were defending 403 seats. In 1997 they won 418 seats leaving the Tories with just 165. Frankly 232 is a lot better than 165.
What Labour are lacking is not numbers but leaders.
You forget the SNP, and the nightmare for Labour I have outlined.
Labour 1,2,3,4,5,6,7? points ahead in the polls.
SNP are in the mix.
JoeVoter: "F*** that, where's my Tory candidate?"
Do you think even very very strong (Sturgeonesque in Scotland) leadership ratings can't win the next Election for Labour with the SNP about ?
Surbiton As I posted below there are now 5 million ethnic minority voters in Britain, and Umunna is perfectly placed to appeal to suburban middle Britain even if he loses a few votes to UKIP in Barnsley
IMO focusing so strongly on ethnicity is one of the problems for the left in the UK today. Voters in Middle England don't have a problem voting for people who happen to be from an ethnic minority like Sajid Javid and Nadhim Zahawi but they don't like it being a big issue.
I was just in a Wetherspoons in Angel, Islington (not my normal drinking estab, but the GF likes her cheap Sailor Jerrys). What struck me was how casually, automatically, unthinkingly multiracial it was - black, brown, white, and Polish, English, Spanish, with not even a hint of awareness of racial difference. Just everyone drinking, dancing and snogging (such is modern Britain, or at least London).
And yet there was an elephant not in the room. Islam.
Race has never been (or at least today is not) the problem. Cultural differences are. Multiculturalism which is supported by Labour, the Tories, the Liberals and UKIP is the problem. It won't stop. Without a strong domestic culture I really don;t see what England can do., it won't create any civic society.
Sorry if already posted but what do people think about Dan Jarvis MP as Labour's next leader? A former Parachute Regiment Commander,single father for a time after his wife died of cancer, Barnsley MP, not associated with divisions of Blair-left etc
As an ethnic minority, I personally don't know any BMEs running their droves to the Conservatives/UKIP. But there you go.
Oh yes I forgot you speak for everyone that shares a characteristic with you.
What are people that take your shoe size watching on telly at the moment generally?
I never said I did - I was simply providing a different anecdotal evidence to one PBers were.
To give you your dues I doubt there are many 20 yr old female BAME lefty warriors that spend their Saturday nights talking politics online with men two or three times her age so you are quite unique
You're right I'm pretty rare (although I'm studying for exams at the mo, which is why I'm having less nights out than usual). You usually don't meet 21, BAME, feminist, arsenal-loving, Charlie-Brooker-loving girls on political blogs. Still, I do know many young people of all different kinds of backgrounds, including young BMEs.
Problem for Labour now is how the hell do they win from here?
...
Labour isn't going to get the numbers of seat's they need in one election to be able to form the government.
They must prepare for a ten year recovery with 2020 all about reversing the damage that has been inflicted on them in 2010 and 2015, then the possibility if there of a push towards government in 2025.
Of course if the Lib-Dems hadn't been wiped out there might have been the chance of a Lab/Lib-Dem coalition in 2020, but the Lib-Dems will be in recovery mode next time as well, so that makes a Lab/Lib coalition highly unlikely.
I think we've got another decade of Conservative rule and Labour out of power for 15 years minimum.
'Where do labour go from here?' I fear this is going to become boring.
In 2005 Labour won 355 seats. After 2015 they have 232. They are 100 behind the Tories. Bad enough though not impossible. However we should remember that 'before' the 2005 election Labour were defending 403 seats. In 1997 they won 418 seats leaving the Tories with just 165. Frankly 232 is a lot better than 165.
What Labour are lacking is not numbers but leaders.
You forget the SNP, and the nightmare for Labour I have outlined.
Labour 1,2,3,4,5,6,7? points ahead in the polls.
SNP are in the mix.
JoeVoter: "F*** that, where's my Tory candidate?"
Do you think even very very strong (Sturgeonesque in Scotland) leadership ratings can't win the next Election for Labour with the SNP about ?
Sorry if already posted but what do people think about Dan Jarvis MP as Labour's next leader? A former Parachute Regiment Commander,single father for a time after his wife died of cancer, Barnsley MP, not associated with divisions of Blair-left etc
There are a lot of pro-Jarvis posts on the previous thread iirc but most seemed to come from the right. The consensus was that he has an impressive biography. Whether he has the necessary political experience to lead the party, or the popularity within it to be elected, are other questions.
Why, he was as guilty as the Tories for the racist lies about Scotland. He repeated anti-Scottish rhetoric on an hourly basis. If I cost him a seat, good. In reality he just didn't get the votes he needed. He was a failure.
You can't really blame people when Alex Salmond was going around saying the SNP would be writing Labour's budget. Hopefully they get FFA and can look on as they squirm.
I can't blame people for not understanding a joke? The Tories were putting up billboards with Ed Miliband in Alex and then Nicola's pocket. Then posters about Nicola puppeteering miliband.
The only people to blame for Labour's defeat are Labour. The only people to blame for the end of the Union are the Tories and their UKIP friends.
Sorry if already posted but what do people think about Dan Jarvis MP as Labour's next leader? A former Parachute Regiment Commander,single father for a time after his wife died of cancer, Barnsley MP, not associated with divisions of Blair-left etc
There are a lot of pro-Jarvis posts on the previous thread iirc but most seemed to come from the right. The consensus was that he has an impressive biography. Whether he has the necessary political experience to lead the party, or the popularity within it to be elected, are other questions.
Popularity is an issue, but given he commanded men in the army, I think he can command a political party
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
Mary Creagh could be a far better candidate than Cooper.
You heard it here first...
I have met her. She is quite level headed. But the Daily Mail's of this world will find something.
People tend to forget that Labour's win in 1997 was a direct result of September 1992 - the ERM debacle. So, when Blair took over after John Smith's death, Labour was 20% ahead and Blair was far more difficult to attack. The Tory credibility was practically zero. Brown was also a capable shadow Chancellor.
The Right wing gutter press still attacked Cherie about her CND past but times were different. They could not land a blow.
Iraq changed all that, particularly with Labour supporters.
Dair And the only people to blame for voting to keep Scotland in the Union are the Scots themselves, only 35% of Scots voted SNP on Thursday, about 50% of Scots voted No last September
Sorry if already posted but what do people think about Dan Jarvis MP as Labour's next leader? A former Parachute Regiment Commander,single father for a time after his wife died of cancer, Barnsley MP, not associated with divisions of Blair-left etc
There are a lot of pro-Jarvis posts on the previous thread iirc but most seemed to come from the right. The consensus was that he has an impressive biography. Whether he has the necessary political experience to lead the party, or the popularity within it to be elected, are other questions.
Popularity is an issue, but given he commanded men in the army, I think he can command a political party
On topic with the poll showing 40% Tory support I'm not remotely surprised. People like to back a winner.
I said before the election that after an SNP landslide we'll see polls showing at least 55% support for independence. These things have a habit of gathering momentum. I'll repeat that now, expect to see a 55% plus level of independence support soon.
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
No one knows what 5 years will hold. I remember people saying Labour would never win again in 1992.
I remember people saying the Tories might not win a majority for a generation, after 1997.
And, as it turned out, they were completely right.
Nationalist Scotland (and now UKIP and potentially PC) represent an existential threat to Labour, like nothing your party has seen before. Ignoring this truth is utterly stupid.
Saying it's too early to write anything off does not imply anything is ignored.
PS Congratulations on your prescient observation that 2015 would be another 1992. You nailed it, unlike me (and others).
I shall regard your predictions with the requisite respect, in future.
And in return I will offer sincere advice: I really do think this is not another average defeat for Labour, it is possibly epochal, unless the party learns. Scotland changes everything, and the exciting habit of Not Voting Labour might easily spread southwards.
How do you feel the budgetary pressures this coalition will be working under impact that? 2010 to 2015 will be a picnic compared to this parliament. Outside of specific areas, we have had more consolidation rather than real reductions. But real departmental reductions are part of the budget now. How are they going to find these £12 billion welfare cuts without seriously pissing off a load of people?
PT No, Obama also won big margins with the Hispanic and Asian vote, more than Kerry won and got more ethnic minority voters to the polls, not just with Black voters. Of course if Labour got almost all those 3% of black voters to the polls and increased black turnout as Obama did that also is not to be sniffed at. In 2012 ethnic minority turnout in the US actually rose higher than white turnout
Comments
Suprised Dair isn't in London with his non-fascist peaceful comrades:
https://twitter.com/CaptainWeeab00/status/597163891181912064
But vote for him? 'Sorry Nigel but...'
Yes he is a sorry Nigel all right.
no it was that Aston Ham vs West Villa United on MOTD.
http://www.racecard.org.uk/equality/race-and-elections-how-the-ethnic-minority-vote-could-decide-the-next-prime-minister/
Congratulations Blair. His attempted gerrymandering has instead become a self inflicted amputation of one of Labour's legs.
Doesn't this support the idea that something happened, e.g. undecideds going Tory, rather than a problem with weighting?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUBW0n0EGv0
Torbay
Make it 4 and 40 and I'll agree it's 10 times the amount
That's why I wouldn't vote for abbot or khan but would vote for Patel and kwasi
I know a huge number of people who are left leaning and BME but voted Tory due to how anti aspiration and business the Labour party are perceived as being.
The whole left wing 'working people' nonsense and particularly the association with the unions is way past its sell by date. They need to stop the 'Labour Movement' stuff and just be a political party. As long as they are in hock to the unions they can never change.
Labour needs to take a hard look at what it has to offer in today's economy. Everybody seems to have worked out that the best unemployment benifit is a JOB, so they need to come up with pro-business policies that appeal to aspirational middle class folks who want to earn some good money and better themselves.
You can't do that with 'soak the rich', destroying pensions and lefty policies.
In any event how can a proportional system not take into account the 34% who did not vote?
Labour built up a strong following in BME groups by interpreting the world through the prism of class, and of anti-imperialist sympathies. The flawed concept of multiculturism came later.
His company has reserved right to use the logo with letters spelling 'love'
Trademark can be used on trinkets, stationery, wallets and even lingerie
He has been selling T-shirts with similar logo on his website for at least £30
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3075121/Poor-old-Russell-wants-launch-revolution-quaintly-capitalist-fashion-wants-brand-spelling-sell-trinkets-masses.html
Up the workers....now drive on driver...
"and all the polls say Labour are 6 points ahead, an amazing turnaround from 2015, for the New New Labour party. However, experts say Labour are still likely to fall short of an overall majority. Labour leader Mary Creagh has ruled out any kind of deal with the SNP. She has even written it in her own blood on the wall of Labour Party HQ in London..."
Voters: "Just show me the box marked Conservative..."
They must prepare for a ten year recovery with 2020 all about reversing the damage that has been inflicted on them in 2010 and 2015, then the possibility if there of a push towards government in 2025.
Of course if the Lib-Dems hadn't been wiped out there might have been the chance of a Lab/Lib-Dem coalition in 2020, but the Lib-Dems will be in recovery mode next time as well, so that makes a Lab/Lib coalition highly unlikely.
I think we've got another decade of Conservative rule and Labour out of power for 15 years minimum.
Is the 600 seat Parliament actually law ? I thought the LDs didn't vote for that.
I think it is fair to say they have improved in the last few years!!
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-politics/date-of-next-scottish-referendum
Odds on Paddy Power still being around in 2035?
I'm sure many countries have found a way of not taking account of non-voters. Probably they threaten them with having to read some of the nonsense objections to PR on pb.com and such people decide that voting is preferable.
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/588242783317712896
I think we're now looking at a long run of Con government (15 years) probably followed by a long run of Lab government...
Penny Dreadful sounds more like a Kipper than anything I have read elsewhere.
+100 seats, or ... nothing....
What are people that take your shoe size watching on telly at the moment generally?
In 2005 Labour won 355 seats. After 2015 they have 232. They are 100 behind the Tories. Bad enough though not impossible. However we should remember that 'before' the 2005 election Labour were defending 403 seats. In 1997 they won 418 seats leaving the Tories with just 165.
Frankly 232 is a lot better than 165.
What Labour are lacking is not numbers but leaders.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labours-next-leader-steely-eyed-5670953
Chasing votes with identity politics is the way to splinter the country rather than unite it. It is far better to engage with these communities on the same issues as ethnic Britons: Jobs, schools, housing, university fees, health care etc.
Labour 1,2,3,4,5,6,7? points ahead in the polls.
SNP are in the mix.
JoeVoter: "F*** that, where's my Tory candidate?"
Look at what was said about Labour in 1992 and the Tories post 1997, as has been mentioned here. Further afield, look at Canada where for ages it looked very, very difficult for the Tories to win a majority government, which they did at the last election. Even India, which has a party system and regional politics that frankly makes ours look exceptionally simple and straightforward, just elected its first majority government in 30 years. Sure, the circumstances need to be there to allow parties to succeed, but to absolutely rule things out occuring under FPTP now looks fairly shortsighted as far as Im concerned.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labours-next-leader-steely-eyed-5670953
The USA is only 77.7% white and 13% specifically are black.
The UK is 87% white and 3% specifically are black
U.S. Turnout is only 60% and much lower in the minorities. The UK turnout is higher at 67%
But on the youtube clips I watched, he didn't seem to come across that well at all. Perhaps he can find a way to loosen up a bit or something?
I dunno. Voters want humans for politicians.
The only people to blame for Labour's defeat are Labour. The only people to blame for the end of the Union are the Tories and their UKIP friends.
'Is the 600 seat Parliament actually law ? I thought the LDs didn't vote for that.'
The implementation was delayed until after the 2015 election.
People tend to forget that Labour's win in 1997 was a direct result of September 1992 - the ERM debacle. So, when Blair took over after John Smith's death, Labour was 20% ahead and Blair was far more difficult to attack. The Tory credibility was practically zero. Brown was also a capable shadow Chancellor.
The Right wing gutter press still attacked Cherie about her CND past but times were different. They could not land a blow.
Iraq changed all that, particularly with Labour supporters.
?
I said before the election that after an SNP landslide we'll see polls showing at least 55% support for independence. These things have a habit of gathering momentum. I'll repeat that now, expect to see a 55% plus level of independence support soon.