Scotland will now get more powers and the dominant constitutional debate will move to the EU.
Either the UK votes to exit, in which case Scotland probably leaves the UK too, or it narrowly votes In, which could well give UKIP the same boost the SNP had in Scotland, especially if Cameron led the In campaign. A large In margin is the least likely outcome in my view
SO Chuka in the Guardian today on where Labour went wrong.
'First, we spoke to our core voters but not to aspirational, middle-class ones. We talked about the bottom and top of society, about the minimum wage and zero-hour contracts, about mansions and non-doms. But we had too little to say to the majority of people in the middle.
Second, we allowed the impression to arise that we were not on the side of those who are doing well. We talked a lot – quite rightly – about the need to address “irresponsible” capitalism, for more political will to tackle inequality, poverty and injustice (and we must never give the appearance that we are relaxed about them). But we talked too little about those creating wealth and doing the right thing.
That’s why I’ve always argued you cannot be pro-business by beating up on the terms and conditions of their workers and the TRADE unions that play an important role representing them.'
But it was the working class votes they lost which destroyed them, the Guardian reading, BBC watching bunch turned out for Labour in London. The next Labour candidate needs to appeal to those people that they lost just now to UKIP. Chuka doesn't do that. He would destroy any remnant of SLAB and make Labour an even more inner city/metropolitan focussed organisation.
He is, IMO, the worst candidate of them all and you are applying US voting customs to the UK, but forgetting that the UK Conservatives are basically the equivalent of the US Democrats, they are both centre right parties economically and centre left socially. There is basically no room for Labour to fight on the same turf unless the Tories indulge themselves with a disaster candidate who will shift them to the right once Dave retires.
The dog whistle about the SNP was a major factor. I heard two women who had voted postally talking about how terrified of the SNP having influence... Can say exactly when it was but it was a good week before the GE.
How helpful of Salmond to be taking about writing the Labour party budget.
But it’s all too common for those BBC staffers who aren’t on the North London dinner party circuit to complain about being sidelined. ‘It’s a bit like walking into a Sunday meeting of the Flat Earth Society. As they discuss great issues of the day, they discuss them from the point of view that the earth is flat. If someone says, “No, no, no, the earth is round!”, they think this person is an extremist.
Jeff Randall
And that in a nutshell was the BBC GE night coverage....like a load of flat earthers that had been shown images of Earth taken from the space station for the first time.
It occurs to me that one of Chukka's biggest obstacles might be being the focus of attacks that have been directed at Cameron in his time against Brown and Miliband - trying to equate an ease of manner and personal charisma better than the other candidates as meaning that he also has no substance.
Now, people can argue that is genuinely the case for Chukka - that is my current impression, it will be interesting to see if he can offer more - and still in fact the case with Cameron, but merely cementing the connection that good presentation = lack of substance can be a risk whether it is true or not, although Cameron has shown it won't necessarily work.
I also liked Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, so this should be considered a serious warning sign.
Really? Really? You are certifiable.
Lots of people think he's a nice guy. But unfortunately there's still an attitude that a leader needs to be able to make convincing arm movements in an open collared shirt, not be intelligent
Big mistake. His resignation speech used some of the right words but the tone was unrepentant - he will be a thorn in the side of any sensible leader they might choose and if he has any influence in the eventual winner it would not be good for Labour.
@surbiton was asking about the London result and advocating regional polls excluding London. The London results were very variable for Labour - some big swings for in the East and of course in Ilford north but also swings against Labour in the 3 north London marginals they missed. In south London the swing was also much more variable and they only won Ealing and Brentford by whiskers. I think London wide polling for a GE would be nigh on impossible to be reliable - last Thursday it was a city of many paces - which actually is no surprise for anyone who has lived there. Overall they did far less well there than the polls suggested although it was their best result overall., but I think that in part was down to demographic changes rather than a successful campaign.
In one of the most ethnically diverse constituencies in London (Harrow East) the Tories increased their majority because of Indians turning out in huge numbers. Labour's pandering to Muslims with their blasphemy laws has hurt them in at least three constituencies, but helped them pick up Ilford North and strengthen their hold on other parts of East London. If we get results down to the ward level I can imagine Ponders End, Enfield Wash and Enfield Lock were all a very deep shade of red. It is the Islamic vote which drove Labour's "recovery" in London. Divisive politics from Labour.
The Labour MP for Tower Hamlets is secular and is a woman. That has to be the future. Likewise, the woman who defeated Galloway in Bradford.
It was a truly superb outcome. And a very hopeful one.
Just the sort of voice that Labour needs in Parliament. The scale of domestic abuse in the Asian community is a story largely untold, but does anyone think that the taxi rapists of Rotherham returned home to be dutiful husbands and fathers?
Frankly this victory was the best result of the night as far as I was concerned.
handandmouse I do not want to go over all the arguments I made yesterday again, but being smug and metropolitan did not stop Blair and Obama and Labour does not need to target the working class, they are in relative decline and moving to UKIP in many cases, but the suburban middle classes Blair won. Umunna needs to add them to the ethnic vote and public sector vote much as Obama did. Labour no longer need to win working class marginals like Rugby and Romford for a majority after Thursday, they both had big Tory majorities, they do need to win suburban Hendon, Brighton Kemptown and Worcester which had smaller majorities
I also liked Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, so this should be considered a serious warning sign.
Really? Really? You are certifiable.
Lots of people think he's a nice guy. But unfortunately there's still an attitude that a leader needs to be able to make convincing arm movements in an open collared shirt, not be intelligent
It really should not hard to find someone who is both, or be so good at the latter as to make the lack of the former not so much of a problem.
Hell, we have constantly heard about how phony and insincere Cameron is supposed to be, and thus that his generally agreeable style was in fact no bonus at all, but now we're supposed to buy it's too effective?
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
Our orgy of consumption may have to be later in the year. I am not based in London and have a fair bit of travelling to do for the next couple of months. July, somewhere around London Bridge works best for me - unless you ever find yourself in Leamington, of course.
SoWo:
Not a good place to go to. Find somewhere else is my advice.
Thats really interesting. John Harris has done some really good videos
Ok, i dont want to kick the boot in, as she has already lost, however did anyone else not find that labour candidate depressingly mediocre and inexperienced? This looks a seat that labour would have been expecting to win, yet the candidate appears to be applying for student union position.
Must have been an all women shortlist. Sometimes when you knock out the competition what you are left with is substandard.
One other fact that PB tories dismissed as false, was the UKIP notion that they were picking up more votes from Labour than Tories, which has been born out by the results.
PB Tories frequently pointed out that UKIP was a Labour problem too - to hoots of derision from Labour supporters....
Tim and I argued for days on end about it...he simply wouldn't believe it. Same for 'Hugh'... He thought I was a Tory boy who ran a business exploiting my staff! I wish
Shame they're not here to gloat to... Or to ask for money!
You owe me beer and lunch ;-)
Yes
Who else can honestly say they backed Ed Miliband and the Liberal Democrats to do badly and lost money doing so? Quite incredible... Although part of me loves backing unlucky losing bets... I need a vehicle for complaint
Whereabouts shall we go? I don't really work in the daytime, hence 15000 posts on here! So anyday suits me really
I've got a couple of bets with you: the 4x UKIP/Lib Dem one (which I won) and a £10 charity bet from a couple of days ago that I remember nothing about!
Can you recall the details /how do you want to settle up?
I can't remember the details but I'm assuming I lost!
The LD Ukip one... Jesus how did I lose that? Any idea how much that was for?
Let me know the amounts and your details and I'll send the money over
Anyone that lost a bet to me is free to get in touch as well by the way
I see Sturgeon's tactic will be that whatever Cameron offers, she will say it is not enough and demand more. Obviously at some point he will say that is going too far, and she will claim he has betrayed Scotland and that Independence has to be gone for again. Expected, but still effective.
Yep, that is exactly how it will play out. Either her bluff gets called or Scotland becomes independent. Either way, the SNP is not going to be as popular in five years time as it is now.
Surely there'll eventually be a split in the SNP. Apparently the SNP is to the Left of Labour, but its voters aren't, at least most of them aren't. The government (and Scottish Labour, for that matter) needs to make sure that split happens and that requires a charm offensive. Cameron needs to get up there as often as possible, shaking hands, giving speeches, pretending there's another referendum next week. He might not get a good reception, but that's the point. The nicer he is and the angrier the loony nats get, the more likely that the SNP will split, or at least that it'll lose the 10-20% of additional support it needs to create a drive for a new referendum.
That is not going to happen in short term and Cameron visiting would make it even less likely. His few visits so far are in locked rooms , secret and only to his chums, it will stay that way.
In that wonderful way one sometimes can, I've just backed Jon Cruddas to be the next Labour leader with Betfair at odds of 460 for a 3p stake ..... I therefore stand to win £13.77 (less 5% comm'n) if I'm proved right! Reasonable value I thought as he's as short as 33/1 elsewhere! More seriously though I'd fancy backing him being elected Deputy Leader but as yet I can't find a market for this. I know HenryG is a long term fan - it would be interesting to learn his views of Cruddas' chances of landing this particular gig.
I've taken the £5 at 450, also have laid David Miliband in this market.
I think I'm due a small commission should you land this one!
Just trying to build up green on the field at this point
Thats really interesting. John Harris has done some really good videos
Ok, i dont want to kick the boot in, as she has already lost, however did anyone else not find that labour candidate depressingly mediocre and inexperienced? This looks a seat that labour would have been expecting to win, yet the candidate appears to be applying for student union position.
Must have been an all women shortlist. Sometimes when you knock out the competition what you are left with is substandard.
Yep, she was awful. She should have said to whoever that person/handler was off-camera that the gauardian could join her. Made her look like she was just some managed mindless fool.
kle4 Indeed, being telegenic, appealing and being 'on your side' is now more important for a PM than having 'substance', they can hire advisers and appoint ministers who have that
Thats really interesting. John Harris has done some really good videos
Ok, i dont want to kick the boot in, as she has already lost, however did anyone else not find that labour candidate depressingly mediocre and inexperienced? This looks a seat that labour would have been expecting to win, yet the candidate appears to be applying for student union position.
Must have been an all women shortlist. Sometimes when you knock out the competition what you are left with is substandard.
She was worse than most students who campaign for roles in the SU...in fact are we sure she wasn't?
I see Sturgeon's tactic will be that whatever Cameron offers, she will say it is not enough and demand more. Obviously at some point he will say that is going too far, and she will claim he has betrayed Scotland and that Independence has to be gone for again. Expected, but still effective.
the Tories GE campaign of fear has more or less sealed the fate of the Union.
If anything has imperilled the Union it is the mullering of the biggest Unionist party in Scotland.
Yet, somehow, this is the Tories fault?
With logic that I cannot quite follow, because the Tories attacked the soon to be hugely successful Indy party, it is their fault that that Indy party won, or at least there is an assumption that somehow the Union would be in great shape after the SNP won a landslide, if only the Tories had not attacked them.
???
The SNP were clocking between 45 and 50 points in October before the whole Vote Ed get Nicola/Salmond stuff started, and the Scottish polling proved to be very accurate. I don't think the Tory campaign made the slightest bit of difference in Scotland, but it did help win them the majority in England and Wales. What imperilled the Union was Jim Murphy and Ed Miliband. Both of them are completely and utterly useless and I still don't understand how Jim Murphy is still standing, he needs to be taken out the back and shot by whoever takes over and they need a proper SLAB leadership contest, there must be some talent there.
Well, if people aren't like that, why do they read those newspapers?
But what do I know. I would no more live in suburban England than I would put out my own eyes. (I can't live in the countryside - I have grand mal and so am not allowed to drive.
And everyone I know is either a graduate or a member of an ethnic minority - except my son.
Simples. Gossip and sport. The politics is just background noise to many people.
Chuka first of the contenders to get a TV interview, in the soft hands of Andrew Marr at 9
Nicola is also on, presumably to explain why she failed to lock the Tories out of Downing Street and how she won't win votes against a majority government. Or not.
Liz Kendal has to wait until 1:30...
...and gets Andrew Neil.
Liz Kendall on Neill will be interesting. See how she gets on with the toughest interviewer. Neill knows how to deliver tough questions, much more so than Paxo.
I suspect some fairly well rehearsed, orchestrated, war plans are now in operation from leading contenders.
One other fact that PB tories dismissed as false, was the UKIP notion that they were picking up more votes from Labour than Tories, which has been born out by the results.
PB Tories frequently pointed out that UKIP was a Labour problem too - to hoots of derision from Labour supporters....
Tim and I argued for days on end about it...he simply wouldn't believe it. Same for 'Hugh'... He thought I was a Tory boy who ran a business exploiting my staff! I wish
Shame they're not here to gloat to... Or to ask for money!
You owe me beer and lunch ;-)
Yes
Who else can honestly say they backed Ed Miliband and the Liberal Democrats to do badly and lost money doing so? Quite incredible... Although part of me loves backing unlucky losing bets... I need a vehicle for complaint
Whereabouts shall we go? I don't really work in the daytime, hence 15000 posts on here! So anyday suits me really
I've got a couple of bets with you: the 4x UKIP/Lib Dem one (which I won) and a £10 charity bet from a couple of days ago that I remember nothing about!
Can you recall the details /how do you want to settle up?
The LD Ukip one... Jesus how did I lose that?
Happens to the best of us. I had a bet with a poster on Tories being less than 300 seats, when I paid up they confessed they'd really thought that was a loser at one point and had considered offering evens to settle it, but held their nerve in the end. Fortunately my flutters are only of the small variety.
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I have a feeling labour might not like the answers...
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I have a feeling labour might not like the answers...
Which is the core of the problem.
The fact Team Ed were convinced they had won right up to 10pm, when as Loud Howard revealed Tories already had a good idea they likely had over 300 early in the evening. Even Bet Fred knew....says Labour have a huge problem when it comes to having this kinda of intelligence.
I've decided that my preffered (total fantasy never going ot happen) result for an EU Referendum is that England votes narrowly to leave but an overwhelming majority to Stay is recorded in Scotland which tips the result incredibly narrowly to 'In'.
I would get a subscription to the Daily Mail/Telegraph if that was to happen.
SO Chuka in the Guardian today on where Labour went wrong.
'First, we spoke to our core voters but not to aspirational, middle-class ones. We talked about the bottom and top of society, about the minimum wage and zero-hour contracts, about mansions and non-doms. But we had too little to say to the majority of people in the middle.
Second, we allowed the impression to arise that we were not on the side of those who are doing well. We talked a lot – quite rightly – about the need to address “irresponsible” capitalism, for more political will to tackle inequality, poverty and injustice (and we must never give the appearance that we are relaxed about them). But we talked too little about those creating wealth and doing the right thing.
That’s why I’ve always argued you cannot be pro-business by beating up on the terms and conditions of their workers and the TRADE unions that play an important role representing them.'
But it was the working class votes they lost which destroyed them, the Guardian reading, BBC watching bunch turned out for Labour in London. The next Labour candidate needs to appeal to those people that they lost just now to UKIP. Chuka doesn't do that. He would destroy any remnant of SLAB and make Labour an even more inner city/metropolitan focussed organisation.
He is, IMO, the worst candidate of them all and you are applying US voting customs to the UK, but forgetting that the UK Conservatives are basically the equivalent of the US Democrats, they are both centre right parties economically and centre left socially. There is basically no room for Labour to fight on the same turf unless the Tories indulge themselves with a disaster candidate who will shift them to the right once Dave retires.
I agree with you 100%. He and Blair are proposing a Tory-Lite Labour party. It worked for Blair and he introduced Tory-Lite policies - student fees, PFI, marketisation of the NHS. But what's the point? You might as well vote Tory.
There is room for a party that is centre left economically and centre right socially. It would appeal to a different and substantial part of the middle. There would be a point to it, and it would be popular.
But Harriet wouldn't be happy in it and it would upset Guardian readers.
I see Sturgeon's tactic will be that whatever Cameron offers, she will say it is not enough and demand more. Obviously at some point he will say that is going too far, and she will claim he has betrayed Scotland and that Independence has to be gone for again. Expected, but still effective.
the Tories GE campaign of fear has more or less sealed the fate of the Union.
If anything has imperilled the Union it is the mullering of the biggest Unionist party in Scotland.
Yet, somehow, this is the Tories fault?
With logic that I cannot quite follow, because the Tories attacked the soon to be hugely successful Indy party, it is their fault that that Indy party won, or at least there is an assumption that somehow the Union would be in great shape after the SNP won a landslide, if only the Tories had not attacked them.
???
The SNP were clocking between 45 and 50 points in October before the whole Vote Ed get Nicola/Salmond stuff started, and the Scottish polling proved to be very accurate. I don't think the Tory campaign made the slightest bit of difference in Scotland, but it did help win them the majority in England and Wales. What imperilled the Union was Jim Murphy and Ed Miliband. Both of them are completely and utterly useless and I still don't understand how Jim Murphy is still standing, he needs to be taken out the back and shot by whoever takes over and they need a proper SLAB leadership contest, there must be some talent there.
I am afraid there is nothing in the cupboard, 3 legged donkeys are all they have left.
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh 11s12 seconds ago .@SKinnock impressive #murnaghan debut. Interesting he says Lab needs to reconnect with business on ‘people, future of planet + profits'
But it’s all too common for those BBC staffers who aren’t on the North London dinner party circuit to complain about being sidelined. ‘It’s a bit like walking into a Sunday meeting of the Flat Earth Society. As they discuss great issues of the day, they discuss them from the point of view that the earth is flat. If someone says, “No, no, no, the earth is round!”, they think this person is an extremist.
Jeff Randall
And that in a nutshell was the BBC GE night coverage....like a load of flat earthers that had been shown images of Earth taken from the space station for the first time.
Really? But isn't David Dimbleby known to favour the Conservative cause? Isn't Nick Robinson also Conservative (so much so that the Conservative Party tried to recruit him as recently as 2011)?
BBC coverage may have been shambolic but save the reds under the beds stuff.
I agree with what many here are saying, Chuka would be a disaster. He's vacuous on policy (whenever anyone goes a tiny bit below the surface he starts puffing) and comes across as smarmy (way more than Blair) and part of the elite. Sure he'd probably advance a bit in London (& Exeter) but it's be fatal for Labour's WWC vote. If I'm honest I can't see how the two parts of the Labour Party can be united. The total lack of talent on the Labour benches is utterly terrifying.
I've decided that my preffered (total fantasy never going ot happen) result for an EU Referendum is that England votes narrowly to leave but an overwhelming majority to Stay is recorded in Scotland which tips the result incredibly narrowly to 'In'.
Ooh, a delicious result, to be sure.
Even funnier, if even more improbable, would be England voting very narrowly to stay In, but Scotland voting Out by just enough to push the result to an overall Out.
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
handandmouse I do not want to go over all the arguments I made yesterday again, but being smug and metropolitan did not stop Blair and Obama and Labour does not need to target the working class, they are in relative decline and moving to UKIP in many cases, but the suburban middle classes Blair won. Umunna needs to add them to the ethnic vote and public sector vote much as Obama did. Labour no longer need to win working class marginals like Rugby and Romford for a majority after Thursday, they both had big Tory majorities, they do need to win suburban Hendon, Brighton Kemptown and Worcester which had smaller majorities
Again, the UK is not the US, there aren't enough people in those groups to get Labour their majority. They need the working classes in a way the Dems don't. We don't have 1m+ Mexicans coming into the border states every year who will eventually vote Labour. Eastern Europeans are pretty evenly split, Indians are majority Conservative, Muslims will vote Labour but policies aimed at them will repel more votes than would be attracted.
There is no easy fix for Labour but abandoning the working classes to UKIP is surely not the answer. You want to turn Labour into the Lib Dems, but at their peak the Lib Dems only won 7m votes which is not enough to break the Tory hold on England.
MaxPB Completely wrong. After Thursday working class Romford, Staffordshire Moorlands, Rugby all had majorities for the Tories over 20%, Rugby was won by Wilson and Attlee, they are lost to Labour and they do not need them to win a majority. In a similar way Obama has lost working class West Virginia, which used to be solid Democrat, and the likes of Kentucky and Tennessee and Missouri which went for Clinton. Suburban Finchley, Hendon, Brighton Kemptown all had majorities for the Tories under 10%, Worcester 11%, and indeed Labour won prosperous Chester and Wirral West which were safe Tory seats in 1992. Obama also won suburban Virginia and Colorado. It is demographic change and Labour has to shift accordingly.
On the economy it is the Tories who have been most pro austerity, like the Republicans in the US, it was Obama who was preaching investment in infrastructure etc much like Labour. It was the Tories who invited McCain to their 2008 conference and the Tea Party occupies much of the same message as UKIP. The same trends apply, Labour needed the working class when the UK had a working class majority, it now has a suburban middle class one, there is no future for it in being UKIP lite, it would lose the suburban middle class and its leftwing supporters in the public sector and ethnic minorities without being able to win back voters from UKIP, some working class voters will continue to vote Labour of course, but it is not the working class Labour needs for power
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
But it’s all too common for those BBC staffers who aren’t on the North London dinner party circuit to complain about being sidelined. ‘It’s a bit like walking into a Sunday meeting of the Flat Earth Society. As they discuss great issues of the day, they discuss them from the point of view that the earth is flat. If someone says, “No, no, no, the earth is round!”, they think this person is an extremist.
Jeff Randall
And that in a nutshell was the BBC GE night coverage....like a load of flat earthers that had been shown images of Earth taken from the space station for the first time.
Really? But isn't David Dimbleby known to favour the Conservative cause? Isn't Nick Robinson also Conservative (so much so that the Conservative Party tried to recruit him as recently as 2011)?
BBC coverage may have been shambolic but save the reds under the beds stuff.
Dimblebore isn't a Tory. For the vast majority of the night it was Marr, Kuennssberg, Matlis, Kellner + Labour guest like Kinnock just talking among themselves for hours on end, totally ignoring the results as they came in.
It was a meeting of the flat earth society chaired by Dimbleby, occasionally leaving said meeting for a bit of reality with Andrew Neil.
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
The only way I can see Labour and the LibDems reviving their fortunes by 2020 is by biting the bullet and merging, this would go a long way to breaking the "metropolitan elite" image of the Labour party. The LibDems activist base will continue to melt away as the electorate continues to punish them for being part of the coalition
In terms of SLAB, a party which is unwilling to even disclose the number of members is never going to revive itself, they need to wake up to how bad things really are. They won't even share their membership numbers with the likes of David Clegg, one of their main MSM cheerleaders. When they announced the over 200,000 members a few days ago they again refused to give a SLAB number to Clegg.
MaxPB Completely wrong. After Thursday working class Romford, Staffordshire Moorlands, Rugby all had majorities for the Tories over 20%, Rugby was won by Wilson and Attlee, they are lost to Labour and they do not need them to win a majority. In a similar way Obama has lost working class West Virginia, which used to be solid Democrat, and the likes of Kentucky and Tennessee and Missouri which went for Clinton. Suburban Finchley, Hendon, Brighton Kemptown all had majorities for the Tories under 10%, Worcester 11%, and indeed Labour won prosperous Chester and Wirral West which were safe Tory seats in 1992. Obama also won suburban Virginia and Colorado. It is demographic change and Labour has to shift accordingly.
On the economy it is the Tories who have been most pro austerity, like the Republicans in the US, it was Obama who was preaching investment in infrastructure etc much like Labour. It was the Tories who invited McCain to their 2008 conference and the Tea Party occupies much of the same message as UKIP. The same trends apply, Labour needed the working class when the UK had a working class majority, it now has a suburban middle class one, there is no future for it in being UKIP lite, it would lose the suburban middle class and its leftwing supporters in the public sector and ethnic minorities without being able to win back voters from UKIP, some working class voters will continue to vote Labour of course, but it is not the working class Labour needs for power
This is the kind of thinking that got Jim Murphy elected as SLAB leader. Look at what has happened there. If Labour abandon the working classes they basically cease to exist as a political force outside of a few core cities. The Conservatives won't make the same mistake as Hague and IDS again. Chuka would be Ed mark 2, just with better presentation. He is a London intellectual who is not able to speak to the Northern core vote. Remember that the North delivered the bulk of Labour's seats where there is a massive working class vote. Abandoning them to UKIP would be a disaster, just to win 20-30 seats in the suburbs of London and Manchester. As a (now Tory member) nothing would delight me more than to see Labour commit suicide by abandoning the WWC to UKIP, but it would be bad for the country.
I see Sturgeon's tactic will be that whatever Cameron offers, she will say it is not enough and demand more. Obviously at some point he will say that is going too far, and she will claim he has betrayed Scotland and that Independence has to be gone for again. Expected, but still effective.
Yep, that is exactly how it will play out. Either her bluff gets called or Scotland becomes independent. Either way, the SNP is not going to be as popular in five years time as it is now.
Surely there'll eventually be a split in the SNP. Apparently the SNP is to the Left of Labour, but its voters aren't, at least most of them aren't. The government (and Scottish Labour, for that matter) needs to make sure that split happens and that requires a charm offensive. Cameron needs to get up there as often as possible, shaking hands, giving speeches, pretending there's another referendum next week. He might not get a good reception, but that's the point. The nicer he is and the angrier the loony nats get, the more likely that the SNP will split, or at least that it'll lose the 10-20% of additional support it needs to create a drive for a new referendum.
Cameron visiting would make it even less likely. His few visits so far are in locked rooms , secret and only to his chums, it will stay that way.
Yes - Cameron being harangued on Princes Street by a spittle flecked Nat would look terrible.
Big mistake. His resignation speech used some of the right words but the tone was unrepentant - he will be a thorn in the side of any sensible leader they might choose and if he has any influence in the eventual winner it would not be good for Labour.
@surbiton was asking about the London result and advocating regional polls excluding London. The London results were very variable for Labour - some big swings for in the East and of course in Ilford north but also swings against Labour in the 3 north London marginals they missed. In south London the swing was also much more variable and they only won Ealing and Brentford by whiskers. I think London wide polling for a GE would be nigh on impossible to be reliable - last Thursday it was a city of many paces - which actually is no surprise for anyone who has lived there. Overall they did far less well there than the polls suggested although it was their best result overall., but I think that in part was down to demographic changes rather than a successful campaign.
In one of the most ethnically diverse constituencies in London (Harrow East) the Tories increased their majority because of Indians turning out in huge numbers. Labour's pandering to Muslims with their blasphemy laws has hurt them in at least three constituencies, but helped them pick up Ilford North and strengthen their hold on other parts of East London. If we get results down to the ward level I can imagine Ponders End, Enfield Wash and Enfield Lock were all a very deep shade of red. It is the Islamic vote which drove Labour's "recovery" in London. Divisive politics from Labour.
The Labour MP for Tower Hamlets is secular and is a woman. That has to be the future. Likewise, the woman who defeated Galloway in Bradford.
It was a truly superb outcome. And a very hopeful one.
Just the sort of voice that Labour needs in Parliament. The scale of domestic abuse in the Asian community is a story largely untold, but does anyone think that the taxi rapists of Rotherham returned home to be dutiful husbands and fathers?
Frankly this victory was the best result of the night as far as I was concerned.
The emphatic nature of it was particularly gratifying.
But it’s all too common for those BBC staffers who aren’t on the North London dinner party circuit to complain about being sidelined. ‘It’s a bit like walking into a Sunday meeting of the Flat Earth Society. As they discuss great issues of the day, they discuss them from the point of view that the earth is flat. If someone says, “No, no, no, the earth is round!”, they think this person is an extremist.
Jeff Randall
And that in a nutshell was the BBC GE night coverage....like a load of flat earthers that had been shown images of Earth taken from the space station for the first time.
Really? But isn't David Dimbleby known to favour the Conservative cause? Isn't Nick Robinson also Conservative (so much so that the Conservative Party tried to recruit him as recently as 2011)?
BBC coverage may have been shambolic but save the reds under the beds stuff.
Labour guest like Kinnock
That was a case of 'enough rope'.....and he duly obliged....
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
Do they publish?
LOL...what do you think?
I think Messina and probably also Crosby will publish at least the broad generalities in the months to come.
On topic, I believe there were cowed kippers rather than just shy ones. I think a lot of people with UKIP VI decided not just not to declare their intention, but ended up not voting at all. State-sanctioned contempt for a non-racist non-sectarian mainstream political party on the scale of what's happened to UKIP is something I believe to be virtually unprecedented.
Boris is surely the big loser of the election. No longer can he be the Tories' saviour after Cameron led them to defeat in 2015, and presumably his day job as Mayor of London rules him out of ministerial office, so that when Cameron does retire in a year or two, Boris will have no Cabinet experience to offer against Osborne, May or anyone else.
I very much doubt David Cameron will retire in a year or to - he is likely to be hugely motivated by his success and needs time to resolve Europe and Scotland. I cannot see him walking away until he has succeeded in both and established himself as one of the Country's greatest Prime Ministers. He has already destroyed all relevant opposition who will take years, if at all, to recover
MaxPB Completely wrong. After Thursday working class Romford, Staffordshire Moorlands, Rugby all had majorities for the Tories over 20%, Rugby was won by Wilson and Attlee, they are lost to Labour and they do not need them to win a majority. In a similar way Obama has lost working class West Virginia, which used to be solid Democrat, and the likes of Kentucky and Tennessee and Missouri which went for Clinton. Suburban Finchley, Hendon, Brighton Kemptown all had majorities for the Tories under 10%, Worcester 11%, and indeed Labour won prosperous Chester and Wirral West which were safe Tory seats in 1992. Obama also won suburban Virginia and Colorado. It is demographic change and Labour has to shift accordingly.
On the economy it is the Tories who have been most pro austerity, like the Republicans in the US, it was Obama who was preaching investment in infrastructure etc much like Labour. It was the Tories who invited McCain to their 2008 conference and the Tea Party occupies much of the same message as UKIP. The same trends apply, Labour needed the working class when the UK had a working class majority, it now has a suburban middle class one, there is no future for it in being UKIP lite, it would lose the suburban middle class and its leftwing supporters in the public sector and ethnic minorities without being able to win back voters from UKIP, some working class voters will continue to vote Labour of course, but it is not the working class Labour needs for power
Labour did indeed employ a fringe coalition against the core strategy. Problem is Britain has a radically different demographic profile to the US, naturally it was an approach that worked only in London. With the baby boomers declining now, Scotland gone and the wwc defecting to UKIP I do struggle to see Labour coming back for a while.
Having now got their reputation for economic competency back, the second Conservative term must focus on prosperity for all and ditch the toxic only for the rich tag.
The only way I can see Labour and the LibDems reviving their fortunes by 2020 is by biting the bullet and merging
That is to fundamentally misunderstand their different philosophies and histories - it wouldn't be a merger - it would be an extinction - of the Liberals.
The tough thing they've got to learn is 'how do they get beyond 'protest party' '(since others have stolen their clothes....)
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
Do they publish?
LOL...what do you think?
I assume they do not. I asked the question in case I was wrong. A technique Labour would do well to emulate...
handandmouse I do not want to go over all the arguments I made yesterday again, but being smug and metropolitan did not stop Blair and Obama and Labour does not need to target the working class, they are in relative decline and moving to UKIP in many cases, but the suburban middle classes Blair won. Umunna needs to add them to the ethnic vote and public sector vote much as Obama did. Labour no longer need to win working class marginals like Rugby and Romford for a majority after Thursday, they both had big Tory majorities, they do need to win suburban Hendon, Brighton Kemptown and Worcester which had smaller majorities
Again, the UK is not the US, there aren't enough people in those groups to get Labour their majority. They need the working classes in a way the Dems don't. We don't have 1m+ Mexicans coming into the border states every year who will eventually vote Labour. Eastern Europeans are pretty evenly split, Indians are majority Conservative, Muslims will vote Labour but policies aimed at them will repel more votes than would be attracted.
There is no easy fix for Labour but abandoning the working classes to UKIP is surely not the answer. You want to turn Labour into the Lib Dems, but at their peak the Lib Dems only won 7m votes which is not enough to break the Tory hold on England.
"Indians majority Conservative"
Have you got any evidence to back up this assertion?
One other fact that PB tories dismissed as false, was the UKIP notion that they were picking up more votes from Labour than Tories, which has been born out by the results.
PB Tories frequently pointed out that UKIP was a Labour problem too - to hoots of derision from Labour supporters....
Tim and I argued for days on end about it...he simply wouldn't believe it. Same for 'Hugh'... He thought I was a Tory boy who ran a business exploiting my staff! I wish
Shame they're not here to gloat to... Or to ask for money!
You owe me beer and lunch ;-)
Yes
Who else can honestly say they backed Ed Miliband and the Liberal Democrats to do badly and lost money doing so? Quite incredible... Although part of me loves backing unlucky losing bets... I need a vehicle for complaint
Whereabouts shall we go? I don't really work in the daytime, hence 15000 posts on here! So anyday suits me really
I've got a couple of bets with you: the 4x UKIP/Lib Dem one (which I won) and a £10 charity bet from a couple of days ago that I remember nothing about!
Can you recall the details /how do you want to settle up?
I can't remember the details but I'm assuming I lost!
The LD Ukip one... Jesus how did I lose that? Any idea how much that was for?
Let me know the amounts and your details and I'll send the money over
Anyone that lost a bet to me is free to get in touch as well by the way
I think I won the charity bet (it was something like UKIP less than 3.5 seats at evens) as well as the main one.
For the charity bet please just want to stick a tenner in your local CofE church collection box.
I'll see if I can find the details of the main one - not sure exactly where they are at the moment!
If that's the Labour field, we have to start by saying a Tory win in 2020 looks likely.
They just don't get it - they cannot move left as England will not elect them and to move to aspiration and pro business is already taken by the conservatives - are we seeing the slow but certain demise of labour
All this talk about Cammer's twelve-seat majority igonres the elephant-in-the-room: There is no opposition! Just think about it....
The SNP are an agitating fringe party that most people are happy to ignore; Labour need to address their, current, core-constituents and can not be seen to be "anti-English/Welsh" by allying with "Trews" Salmond (despite their want); Lib-Dems are marmite and cannot campaign against an EU referendum; Plaid are vaccuous; UKIP want a referendum and Carswell will expect the 2017 pledge to be honoured; The Ulster-Scots will be more afraid of a UK break-up (and loss of bennies) and will therefore implicitly support the Tories; and As for the Greens - Pfft!
So Cammer's government can be minimalist for the next five years. Git the painful stuff done up-front and spend the rest of the term in thoughtful reform before GE2020: Just address what is obviouslly wrong and don't pander to issues of little interest.
:simples:
But it's not a 12 seat majority for the Tories (or a 6 seat majority as the leftist thickos on the Beeb insist on describing it). With the 4 Sinn Fein MPs permanently absenting themselves from attending the HoC, the effective majority is actually 20 and therefore a reasonably comfortable one for Cameron. All the more so when one considers the difficulty the inexperienced SNP whips face in forcing the attendance at any specified time of all 56 of their members. Then there's the question of persuading the 10 DUP & UU MPs to oppose the Tories on anything approaching a confidence motion.
I see Sturgeon's tactic will be that whatever Cameron offers, she will say it is not enough and demand more. Obviously at some point he will say that is going too far, and she will claim he has betrayed Scotland and that Independence has to be gone for again. Expected, but still effective.
Yep, that is exactly how it will play out. Either her bluff gets called or Scotland becomes independent. Either way, the SNP is not going to be as popular in five years time as it is now.
Surely there'll eventually be a split in the SNP. Apparently the SNP is to the Left of Labour, but its voters aren't, at least most of them aren't. The government (and Scottish Labour, for that matter) needs to make sure that split happens and that requires a charm offensive. Cameron needs to get up there as often as possible, shaking hands, giving speeches, pretending there's another referendum next week. He might not get a good reception, but that's the point. The nicer he is and the angrier the loony nats get, the more likely that the SNP will split, or at least that it'll lose the 10-20% of additional support it needs to create a drive for a new referendum.
Cameron visiting would make it even less likely. His few visits so far are in locked rooms , secret and only to his chums, it will stay that way.
Yes - Cameron being harangued on Princes Street by a spittle flecked Nat would look terrible.
But for whom?
I'm a great advocate of Major style 'meet the people'. Cameron should take the fight to streets - street speeches from Glasgow to Liverpool and Brighton would do him no harm (to his reputation).
MaxPB I am also a former Tory member, but I can read the signs. Even in Scotland the same principle applies, Labour's only Scottish seat is in middle class Edinburgh, working class Glasgow is gone to them for good. Hague in 2001 campaigned on an anti immigration, pro working class, UKIPlite agenda, he won an increased share of the vote in the likes of Barnsley, but got trounced by Blair in suburban middle class seats like Warwick and Leamington (I was campaigning for the Tories there at the time). The same principle applies to both Labour and the Tories, they need the moderate, suburban middle classes to win, not just the rightwing populists in the working classes nor the leftwing urban intelligentsia, they will not out UKIP UKIP nor for that matter outleftwing the Greens and SNP
Expected. Anyway the Tories GE campaign of fear has more or less sealed the fate of the Union. Right-wing nutjobs like SeanT will again cry into their soup at the prospect of the end of the Union. You can't have it both ways...
Here endith the lesson of the protaganist "Tears-for-Tamil-Tiger-Terrorists": All weep...!
Hmm. Completely lost me - don't know what you're talking about.
My advice - find a dark room and lie down for a bit....
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
Do they publish?
LOL...what do you think?
I assume they do not. I asked the question in case I was wrong. A technique Labour would do well to emulate...
In all seriousness, if the Tories had any sense they would have it all tied up so they can't. But there is no guarantee they will have / that the two research companies agreed to that. If there is no restrictions, I would think if somebody has enough money, they will be able to get at least some of the data. Messina after all works purely for the money.
Diane Abbott on Sky - she increased her majority in Hackney so this is where Labour need to look for how to win in the country. I think she may be onto something there. I do hope that Labour listen and follow her advice - to the letter.
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I have a feeling labour might not like the answers...
Which is the core of the problem.
The fact Team Ed were convinced they had won right up to 10pm, when as Loud Howard revealed Tories already had a good idea they likely had over 300 early in the evening. Even Bet Fred knew....says Labour have a huge problem when it comes to having this kinda of intelligence.
Actually what seems really strange is the lack of feedback loops within the Labour operation. There is more than enough evidence out there that Labour knew what was happening on the ground, but either this information wasn't communicated to the centre or the centre didn't want to know. If Team Ed thought they were doing well until the Exit Poll then it can only because they weren't talking to the troops.
It is interesting that one of the key themes of the election (SNP controlling England) wasn't actually artificially dreamed up by the Conservatives. It was picked up, unprompted by Conservative candidates on the doorstep, fed back to Central Office and then developed into a campaign message to push. Did Labour show any serious signs of refining their campaign messages as they went along (except in a reactive, defensive sense)?
All this talk about Cammer's twelve-seat majority igonres the elephant-in-the-room: There is no opposition! Just think about it....
The SNP are an agitating fringe party that most people are happy to ignore; Labour need to address their, current, core-constituents and can not be seen to be "anti-English/Welsh" by allying with "Trews" Salmond (despite their want); Lib-Dems are marmite and cannot campaign against an EU referendum; Plaid are vaccuous; UKIP want a referendum and Carswell will expect the 2017 pledge to be honoured; The Ulster-Scots will be more afraid of a UK break-up (and loss of bennies) and will therefore implicitly support the Tories; and As for the Greens - Pfft!
So Cammer's government can be minimalist for the next five years. Git the painful stuff done up-front and spend the rest of the term in thoughtful reform before GE2020: Just address what is obviouslly wrong and don't pander to issues of little interest.
:simples:
But it's not a 12 seat majority for the Tories (or a 6 seat majority as the leftist thickos on the Beeb insist on describing it). With the 4 Sinn Fein MPs permanently absenting themselves from attending the HoC, the effective majority is actually 20 and therefore a reasonably comfortable one for Cameron. All the more so when one considers the difficulty the inexperienced SNP whips face in forcing the attendance at any specified time of all 56 of their members. Then there's the question of persuading the 10 DUP & UU MPs to oppose the Tories on anything approaching a confidence motion.
The effective Gov't is DUP + UUP + Con + 2 Sinn Fein, as you put it a decent majority.
DecrepitJohnL Upminster and Epping Forest are the posher parts of Essex there, Romford is full of ex Eastend Londoners, famous for its market and greyhound racing, and represented by the populist Andrew Rosindell, it saw the biggest swing to the Tories in 2001 at a time Blair won a second landslide and was one of the few Tory gains that night, it does not typify the nation
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I bet Messina / Crosby Textor are already sitting on huge amounts of data in regards to this. What worked, what didn't etc.
Do they publish?
LOL...what do you think?
I assume they do not. I asked the question in case I was wrong. A technique Labour would do well to emulate...
In all seriousness, if the Tories had any sense they would have it all tied up so they can't. But there is no guarantee they will have / that the two research companies agreed to that. If there is no restrictions, I would think if somebody has enough money, they will be able to get at least some of the data. Messina after all works purely for the money.
I assume there would be some kind of contractual relationship regarding ownership of the raw data. However, statistical summaries of the data and statements of the techniques would be useful. Even something as simple as stating what the input data was (canvassing returns?) would be useful.
Boris is surely the big loser of the election. No longer can he be the Tories' saviour after Cameron led them to defeat in 2015, and presumably his day job as Mayor of London rules him out of ministerial office, so that when Cameron does retire in a year or two, Boris will have no Cabinet experience to offer against Osborne, May or anyone else.
I very much doubt David Cameron will retire in a year or to - he is likely to be hugely motivated by his success and needs time to resolve Europe and Scotland. I cannot see him walking away until he has succeeded in both and established himself as one of the Country's greatest Prime Ministers. He has already destroyed all relevant opposition who will take years, if at all, to recover
In my eyes this victory will have transformed him from 'the guy with a good DPM' to 'the gu
Diane Abbott on Sky - she increased her majority in Hackney so this is where Labour need to look for how to win in the country. I think she may be onto something there. I do hope that Labour listen and follow her advice - to the letter.
I hope they take the racist's advice as well, 5 more years of Tory majority after 2020 would suit me.
Can I ask a question? All the politicians (and us) are advancing their theses about why Lab lost. Has anybody considered asking the voters? I mean, going round the country, talking to people, asking them? Is anybody actually doing this?
I have a feeling labour might not like the answers...
Which is the core of the problem.
The fact Team Ed were convinced they had won right up to 10pm, when as Loud Howard revealed Tories already had a good idea they likely had over 300 early in the evening. Even Bet Fred knew....says Labour have a huge problem when it comes to having this kinda of intelligence.
Actually what seems really strange is the lack of feedback loops within the Labour operation. There is more than enough evidence out there that Labour knew what was happening on the ground, but either this information wasn't communicated to the centre or the centre didn't want to know. If Team Ed thought they were doing well until the Exit Poll then it can only because they weren't talking to the troops.
Are we sure about that? The story goes that Labour got a terrible shock about how bad the postal votes were going, and hence the rush to see Russell. Up to that point they thought it was all going smoothly. They then convinced themselves that things were fine again, because the polls still looked good.
There is clearly a big disconnect there on the information front.
So the leader of Westminster SNP will now get a designated question at every PMQs?
Should do, if not two...
I seem to remember it was one of the things in 1997 that reminded the Tories just how low they had sunk, and how irrelevant they had become, when the leader of the liberal democrats got two questions at every PMQs.
MaxPB There are 8 million ethnic minority UK citizens, and that is growing, only 3 million voted UKIP on Thursday. The traditional working class represent about 14% of the population now, according to a 2013 survey, the established middle class 23% and the technical middle class, new affluent workers and emergent service workers represent the majority, while Labour already has the precariat. Even if they won back all the traditional working class Labour would be nowhere near a majority. Labour still has a clear lead with all ethnic groups, even with Hindus, where they do relatively best, the Tories only win around 25-30% of their votes http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22007058
On the economy it is the Tories who have been most pro austerity, like the Republicans in the US, it was Obama who was preaching investment in infrastructure etc much like Labour. It was the Tories who invited McCain to their 2008 conference and the Tea Party occupies much of the same message as UKIP. The same trends apply, Labour needed the working class when the UK had a working class majority, it now has a suburban middle class one, there is no future for it in being UKIP lite, it would lose the suburban middle class and its leftwing supporters in the public sector and ethnic minorities without being able to win back voters from UKIP, some working class voters will continue to vote Labour of course, but it is not the working class Labour needs for power
This is the kind of thinking that got Jim Murphy elected as SLAB leader. Look at what has happened there. If Labour abandon the working classes they basically cease to exist as a political force outside of a few core cities. The Conservatives won't make the same mistake as Hague and IDS again. Chuka would be Ed mark 2, just with better presentation. He is a London intellectual who is not able to speak to the Northern core vote. Remember that the North delivered the bulk of Labour's seats where there is a massive working class vote. Abandoning them to UKIP would be a disaster, just to win 20-30 seats in the suburbs of London and Manchester. As a (now Tory member) nothing would delight me more than to see Labour commit suicide by abandoning the WWC to UKIP, but it would be bad for the country.
HYUFD is right. Where New Labour got it right was to pitch to aspirant people, and they increasingly either live in the suburbs or aspire to do so.
No one wants to live on a sink inner city estate. What they want is a little of what they see others having. Better more fulfilling jobs, a home where it is safe for kids to play outside, a place where they can invite round friends, etc. Aspiration sells. It may not always be a realistic ambition, but it is what people would choose if it was open to them. Appealing to the suburban mentality is not fashionable, Gentrified inner city or rural retreat is much more so, but suburbs are where most potential Labour voters either live or want to live.
I see it locally in Loughborough and also NW Leics. The engineering and mining that built these towns are gone, the new estates and service industries being built here are changing the demographics. In 2010 they were lost to the Blues and both look like safe seats now. Broxtowe too...
Scotland will now get more powers and the dominant constitutional debate will move to the EU.
Either the UK votes to exit, in which case Scotland probably leaves the UK too, or it narrowly votes In, which could well give UKIP the same boost the SNP had in Scotland, especially if Cameron led the In campaign. A large In margin is the least likely outcome in my view
I suspect you are wrong: IN VOTES % x 2015 GE Market Share Labour voters: 70% IN. x 30.5% =21.4% LD voters 95% IN x 7.8% = 7.4% UKIP voters 100% out x 12.6% (12.6)% SNP 100% IN x4.7% = 4.7% Greens etc.. 3.8% x 90% (say) 3.4%
Sub Total 24.3% IN
Conservatives.... Share 36.9%.
To get a OUT answer, they need 65% of ALL Conservatives to vote NO..
That is unlikely in my view.. 50% Out is I suspect the best which would give (-18.9)% OUT or a net Total of 5.4% IN.
I forecast an IN vote unless the EU makes no concessions in which case the above is nonsense..
One other fact that PB tories dismissed as false, was the UKIP notion that they were picking up more votes from Labour than Tories, which has been born out by the results.
PB Tories frequently pointed out that UKIP was a Labour problem too - to hoots of derision from Labour supporters....
Tim and I argued for days on end about it...he simply wouldn't believe it. Same for 'Hugh'... He thought I was a Tory boy who ran a business exploiting my staff! I wish
Shame they're not here to gloat to... Or to ask for money!
You owe me beer and lunch ;-)
Yes
Who else can honestly say they backed Ed Miliband and the Liberal Democrats to do badly and lost money doing so? Quite incredible... Although part of me loves backing unlucky losing bets... I need a vehicle for complaint
Whereabouts shall we go? I don't really work in the daytime, hence 15000 posts on here! So anyday suits me really
I've got a couple of bets with you: the 4x UKIP/Lib Dem one (which I won) and a £10 charity bet from a couple of days ago that I remember nothing about!
Can you recall the details /how do you want to settle up?
I can't remember the details but I'm assuming I lost!
The LD Ukip one... Jesus how did I lose that? Any idea how much that was for?
Let me know the amounts and your details and I'll send the money over
Anyone that lost a bet to me is free to get in touch as well by the way
I think I won the charity bet (it was something like UKIP less than 3.5 seats at evens) as well as the main one.
For the charity bet please just want to stick a tenner in your local CofE church collection box.
I'll see if I can find the details of the main one - not sure exactly where they are at the moment!
Righto, will do
I think those bets were made around Dec 30th as I also forgot the details of one with scrap heap and he quoted that date
So the leader of Westminster SNP will now get a designated question at every PMQs?
Should do, if not two...
I seem to remember it was one of the things in 1997 that reminded the Tories just how low they had sunk, and how irrelevant they had become, when the leader of the liberal democrats got two questions at every PMQs.
Which marginal were you in out of interest, it seems your doorstep mood music was way more in line with the reality than the polls.
MaxPB There are 8 million ethnic minority UK citizens, and that is growing, only 3 million voted UKIP on Thursday. The traditional working class represent about 14% of the population now, according to a 2013 survey, the established middle class 23% and the technical middle class, new affluent workers and emergent service workers represent the majority, while Labour already has the precariat. Even if they won back all the traditional working class Labour would be nowhere near a majority http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22007058
It is arrogance of the most condescending order to suggest that "ethnic voters" would vote on ethnicity alone. That is wrong, furthermore it is pure racism. Every individual voter is an individual, not a race. There are voters for all parties in all races and to lump them solely on their race is nothing other than racism.
Is Cameron DEFINITELY going before the next election? I didn't really follow it, but I never really got the impression that the whole thing was particularly planned, just his current thoughts on the future. It is very easy for someone to take the view that on balance they don't think they will carry on a stressful job some 5 years hence. Whether they feel the same way at a later occasion is another matter.
MaxPB Completely wrong. After Thursday working class Romford, Staffordshire Moorlands, Rugby all had majorities for the Tories over 20%, Rugby was won by Wilson and Attlee, they are lost to Labour and they do not need them to win a majority. In a similar way Obama has lost working class West Virginia, which used to be solid Democrat, and the likes of Kentucky and Tennessee and Missouri which went for Clinton. Suburban Finchley, Hendon, Brighton Kemptown all had majorities for the Tories under 10%, Worcester 11%, and indeed Labour won prosperous Chester and Wirral West which were safe Tory seats in 1992. Obama also won suburban Virginia and Colorado. It is demographic change and Labour has to shift accordingly.
On the economy it is the Tories who have been most pro austerity, like the Republicans in the US, it was Obama who was preaching investment in infrastructure etc much like Labour. It was the Tories who invited McCain to their 2008 conference and the Tea Party occupies much of the same message as UKIP. The same trends apply, Labour needed the working class when the UK had a working class majority, it now has a suburban middle class one, there is no future for it in being UKIP lite, it would lose the suburban middle class and its leftwing supporters in the public sector and ethnic minorities without being able to win back voters from UKIP, some working class voters will continue to vote Labour of course, but it is not the working class Labour needs for power
This is the kind of thinking that got Jim Murphy elected as SLAB leader. Look at what has happened there. If Labour abandon the working classes they basically cease to exist as a political force outside of a few core cities. The Conservatives won't make the same mistake as Hague and IDS again. Chuka would be Ed mark 2, just with better presentation. He is a London intellectual who is not able to speak to the Northern core vote. Remember that the North delivered the bulk of Labour's seats where there is a massive working class vote. Abandoning them to UKIP would be a disaster, just to win 20-30 seats in the suburbs of London and Manchester. As a (now Tory member) nothing would delight me more than to see Labour commit suicide by abandoning the WWC to UKIP, but it would be bad for the country.
Diane Abbott on Sky - she increased her majority in Hackney so this is where Labour need to look for how to win in the country. I think she may be onto something there. I do hope that Labour listen and follow her advice - to the letter.
Left-centre parties will probably work together to undermine this government if they sense the opportunity. The DUP and UUPs are not certs to support the government either - the DUP have their own redlines e.g. The Bedroom Tax.
Given how we've seen safe seats overturned at the GE I don't think anyone can say the new Conservative seats in the South-West are an assurity to be safe seats. A large part of that depends on how the tactical vote in these areas mobilise.
The only way I can see Labour and the LibDems reviving their fortunes by 2020 is by biting the bullet and merging
That is to fundamentally misunderstand their different philosophies and histories - it wouldn't be a merger - it would be an extinction - of the Liberals.
The tough thing they've got to learn is 'how do they get beyond 'protest party' '(since others have stolen their clothes....)
The Libdems are already headed for extinction, once you strip out the tactical voters, particularly in Scotland, their core vote is probably heading below 5%.
Is Cameron DEFINITELY going before the next election? I didn't really follow it, but I never really got the impression that the whole thing was particularly planned, just his current thoughts on the future. It is very easy for someone to take the view that on balance they don't think they will carry on a stressful job some 5 years hence. Whether they feel the same way at a later occasion is another matter.
No way he can get out of what he said...besides he really doesn't enjoy the job that much.
Mr Chillax ain't going to do another GE campaign, all that stress and long hours isn't good for his skin
Is Cameron DEFINITELY going before the next election? I didn't really follow it, but I never really got the impression that the whole thing was particularly planned, just his current thoughts on the future. It is very easy for someone to take the view that on balance they don't think they will carry on a stressful job some 5 years hence. Whether they feel the same way at a later occasion is another matter.
I think he will go after the Referendum. He clearly want's to hand over to Osborne and let him have a run.
So the leader of Westminster SNP will now get a designated question at every PMQs?
Should do, if not two...
Yes, the practice established by Tony Blair was 'two for the third largest party':
One of Tony Blair's first acts as prime minister was to replace the two 15-minute sessions with a single 30-minute session at noon on Wednesdays. The allocated number of questions in each session for the Leader of the Opposition was doubled from three to six, and the leader of the third-largest party (which was the Liberal Party until 1988, after which it was the Liberal Democrats) was given two questions. The first PMQs to use this new format took place on 21 May 1997.
Comments
Either the UK votes to exit, in which case Scotland probably leaves the UK too, or it narrowly votes In, which could well give UKIP the same boost the SNP had in Scotland, especially if Cameron led the In campaign. A large In margin is the least likely outcome in my view
He is, IMO, the worst candidate of them all and you are applying US voting customs to the UK, but forgetting that the UK Conservatives are basically the equivalent of the US Democrats, they are both centre right parties economically and centre left socially. There is basically no room for Labour to fight on the same turf unless the Tories indulge themselves with a disaster candidate who will shift them to the right once Dave retires.
I even found a councilor who hates Gove as he believes in only *qualified* teachers.
Cough....splutter....harrumph!
Jeff Randall
And that in a nutshell was the BBC GE night coverage....like a load of flat earthers that had been shown images of Earth taken from the space station for the first time.
Now, people can argue that is genuinely the case for Chukka - that is my current impression, it will be interesting to see if he can offer more - and still in fact the case with Cameron, but merely cementing the connection that good presentation = lack of substance can be a risk whether it is true or not, although Cameron has shown it won't necessarily work.
But unfortunately there's still an attitude that a leader needs to be able to make convincing arm movements in an open collared shirt, not be intelligent
Frankly this victory was the best result of the night as far as I was concerned.
Triumph of the Unthinking
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/opinion/paul-krugman-triumph-of-the-unthinking.html
So in 2020 focussing on people who are now 23 years older might not give you the result you think.
Labour could however focus on people who voted Labour in 2010 and SNP in 2015 there are more seats at stake.
Hell, we have constantly heard about how phony and insincere Cameron is supposed to be, and thus that his generally agreeable style was in fact no bonus at all, but now we're supposed to buy it's too effective?
Not a good place to go to. Find somewhere else is my advice.
Must have been an all women shortlist. Sometimes when you knock out the competition what you are left with is substandard.
The LD Ukip one... Jesus how did I lose that? Any idea how much that was for?
Let me know the amounts and your details and I'll send the money over
Anyone that lost a bet to me is free to get in touch as well by the way
Which is the core of the problem.
I would get a subscription to the Daily Mail/Telegraph if that was to happen.
There is room for a party that is centre left economically and centre right socially. It would appeal to a different and substantial part of the middle. There would be a point to it, and it would be popular.
But Harriet wouldn't be happy in it and it would upset Guardian readers.
.@SKinnock impressive #murnaghan debut. Interesting he says Lab needs to reconnect with business on ‘people, future of planet + profits'
BBC coverage may have been shambolic but save the reds under the beds stuff.
Please report to Master SlackBaldder! C.f.:
Even funnier, if even more improbable, would be England voting very narrowly to stay In, but Scotland voting Out by just enough to push the result to an overall Out.
There is no easy fix for Labour but abandoning the working classes to UKIP is surely not the answer. You want to turn Labour into the Lib Dems, but at their peak the Lib Dems only won 7m votes which is not enough to break the Tory hold on England.
On the economy it is the Tories who have been most pro austerity, like the Republicans in the US, it was Obama who was preaching investment in infrastructure etc much like Labour. It was the Tories who invited McCain to their 2008 conference and the Tea Party occupies much of the same message as UKIP. The same trends apply, Labour needed the working class when the UK had a working class majority, it now has a suburban middle class one, there is no future for it in being UKIP lite, it would lose the suburban middle class and its leftwing supporters in the public sector and ethnic minorities without being able to win back voters from UKIP, some working class voters will continue to vote Labour of course, but it is not the working class Labour needs for power
It was a meeting of the flat earth society chaired by Dimbleby, occasionally leaving said meeting for a bit of reality with Andrew Neil.
I wonder if you have ever been there!!
In terms of SLAB, a party which is unwilling to even disclose the number of members is never going to revive itself, they need to wake up to how bad things really are. They won't even share their membership numbers with the likes of David Clegg, one of their main MSM cheerleaders. When they announced the over 200,000 members a few days ago they again refused to give a SLAB number to Clegg.
If that's the Labour field, we have to start by saying a Tory win in 2020 looks likely.
But for whom?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-england-32662376
Can Isam create a few books for the Guy-Fawkes Night procession?
# Whom will they promote for the Bonfire, and
# How may Northern-British complaints will have to be handled by Susses police.
It could be a fun market!
https://twitter.com/Suffragentleman/status/596554281286815744
(don't know how to post pictures)
Having now got their reputation for economic competency back, the second Conservative term must focus on prosperity for all and ditch the toxic only for the rich tag.
The tough thing they've got to learn is 'how do they get beyond 'protest party' '(since others have stolen their clothes....)
Have you got any evidence to back up this assertion?
For the charity bet please just want to stick a tenner in your local CofE church collection box.
I'll see if I can find the details of the main one - not sure exactly where they are at the moment!
All the more so when one considers the difficulty the inexperienced SNP whips face in forcing the attendance at any specified time of all 56 of their members.
Then there's the question of persuading the 10 DUP & UU MPs to oppose the Tories on anything approaching a confidence motion.
My advice - find a dark room and lie down for a bit....
https://twitter.com/politicalap/status/597357939637231616
It is interesting that one of the key themes of the election (SNP controlling England) wasn't actually artificially dreamed up by the Conservatives. It was picked up, unprompted by Conservative candidates on the doorstep, fed back to Central Office and then developed into a campaign message to push. Did Labour show any serious signs of refining their campaign messages as they went along (except in a reactive, defensive sense)?
There is clearly a big disconnect there on the information front.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22007058
No one wants to live on a sink inner city estate. What they want is a little of what they see others having. Better more fulfilling jobs, a home where it is safe for kids to play outside, a place where they can invite round friends, etc. Aspiration sells. It may not always be a realistic ambition, but it is what people would choose if it was open to them. Appealing to the suburban mentality is not fashionable, Gentrified inner city or rural retreat is much more so, but suburbs are where most potential Labour voters either live or want to live.
I see it locally in Loughborough and also NW Leics. The engineering and mining that built these towns are gone, the new estates and service industries being built here are changing the demographics. In 2010 they were lost to the Blues and both look like safe seats now. Broxtowe too...
I suspect you are wrong:
IN VOTES % x 2015 GE Market Share
Labour voters: 70% IN. x 30.5% =21.4%
LD voters 95% IN x 7.8% = 7.4%
UKIP voters 100% out x 12.6% (12.6)%
SNP 100% IN x4.7% = 4.7%
Greens etc.. 3.8% x 90% (say) 3.4%
Sub Total 24.3% IN
Conservatives....
Share 36.9%.
To get a OUT answer, they need 65% of ALL Conservatives to vote NO..
That is unlikely in my view.. 50% Out is I suspect the best which would give (-18.9)% OUT or a net Total of 5.4% IN.
I forecast an IN vote unless the EU makes no concessions in which case the above is nonsense..
I think those bets were made around Dec 30th as I also forgot the details of one with scrap heap and he quoted that date
so many worst possible leaders to choose from
Left-centre parties will probably work together to undermine this government if they sense the opportunity. The DUP and UUPs are not certs to support the government either - the DUP have their own redlines e.g. The Bedroom Tax.
Given how we've seen safe seats overturned at the GE I don't think anyone can say the new Conservative seats in the South-West are an assurity to be safe seats. A large part of that depends on how the tactical vote in these areas mobilise.
Mr Chillax ain't going to do another GE campaign, all that stress and long hours isn't good for his skin
One of Tony Blair's first acts as prime minister was to replace the two 15-minute sessions with a single 30-minute session at noon on Wednesdays. The allocated number of questions in each session for the Leader of the Opposition was doubled from three to six, and the leader of the third-largest party (which was the Liberal Party until 1988, after which it was the Liberal Democrats) was given two questions. The first PMQs to use this new format took place on 21 May 1997.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister's_Questions