It's the conservative way of life that many immigrants have in mind when they come here, I would have thought.
Yes, West African immigrants specifically will be Tory voting in the next 10 years. They are conservatively inclined and aspirational. Eastern Europeans as well IMO. As these groups integrate into British life and feel closer to a British identity they will follow the same path as those Indian who also don't vote Labour.
This idea that Labour can build a majority based on immigrant votes is not one that is realistic, it may have been in the pre-Dave era, but the Tories are not seen as a racist party thanks to his influence and UKIP. Yes, Labour may have more immigrant friendly instincts but immigrants are people like all others and have concerns beyond the colour of their skin and the country from which they originate. It is extremely patronising when Labour segregate people by those two attributes, me being brown and of Indian origin doesn't make me any less interested in the economy or want racial quotas. It is not going to work for them and if they push any harder to win the immigrant vote they will be waving goodbye to hundreds of seats in the North as UKIP begin to really eat into their working class vote.
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.
Sounds like wishful thinking - beware what you wish for - another election anytime soon would finish labour and return a much increased majority conservative goverment
I don't think they'll be another election soon, but tbh you're thoughts (as well as some others on here) also sound like wishful thinking. It's one thing to think it'll be difficult for Labour to win in 2020, it's another to think they'll never win a GE again.
Not really - it is a distinct possibility and certainly only Lord Mandelson on Sky today seemed to talk any sense - labour are in denial
If we're taking the situation Labour win never get power again here is this: at some point people get fed up with the incumbent. The idea that the country will forever on elect Conservative governments goes against that pretty much timeless rule of politics.
Indeed. Optimism is just running quite high for many Tories right now, and pessimism for Labour. The SNP would do well to remember that fundamental as well.
Agreed but the optimism is not misplaced - it is a realistic reading of the earthquake that has just happened in British politics
The earthquake was the way in which FPTP in a multi-party system changed the dynamic within each of the contests for the 630 mainland UK seats. There was a Tory swing to Labour - albeit very small - but Labour lost seats and the Tories won an overall majority. Their behind the scenes organisation was clearly brilliant and this allowed them to get the messaging spot on. Crucially, they had a far better understanding of the way the election would work than Labour did. Whoever becomes Labour leader needs to learn that lesson and act on it well before 2020.
However, the death of the Labour party is being greatly exaggerated. Led by the ridiculous Ed and against the backdrop of an economic recovery, the party did get 9.3 million votes. It is nowhere near enough, but it is 30% of the electorate. That is a base from which to start.
Anyone pick up on the comment from Mandelson that the Leadership election based on one member per vote could include up to 2 million union votes if all they do is just register that they are a Labour voter. Any Labour rule book experts out there can clarify? Could have massive betting implications. Has EdM left a toxic legacy guaranteeing unions a more dominating influence?
SLab is dead in Scotland until the constitutional issue is properly resolved. The fight back can only really begin then.
No one knows what is going to happen in the future. All you can do is do your best to shape it yourself such that you restrict your opponents' ability to shape it to their advantage. Then when the future arrives you deal with it. Whatever problems you face your opponents have theirs to face as well.
Judging from their comments, Wilson and MacMillan understood this. Wilson talked about 'pragmatism'. MacMillan of course talked about 'events'.
Exactly, this wasn't a single election issue or one just about climbing back 100 seats - with the SNP in the wings for them - it's not going away for either a long time or SIndy for real.
MaxPB At the 2010 election 68% of ethnic minority voters as a whole voted Labour 16% Tory.
61% of Indians voted Labour, 24% Tory (even if they do not automatically vote Labour), 60% of Pakistanis voted Labour, 30% Tory, Bangladeshi voters voted 72% Labour 18% Tory, Caribbean voters 78% Labour, 9% Tory, African voters 87% Labour, 8% Tory. www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/EMBESbriefingFINALx.pdf
MPSE Working class voters who have moved to UKIP will stick to UKIP, Labour needs to win suburban middle class voters and consolidate its support with ethnic minorities
I trust the BES study a lot more than the Runnymede Trust. The latter is no more than a leftist front organisation.
I still think that the two halfs of Labour are set on different paths. If a Blairite wins I could see a left wing splinter breaking off in the north before electoral oblivion occurs. If a far left leader wins there is the chance of the SDP returning, spearheaded by Ben Bradshaw.
This is truly an existential crisis for Labour. The logic of the current political landscape is that there should be a strong 'Liberal' party and a strong economically left, socially conservative party. The latter space is increasingly being taken by UKIP. When the Lib Dems recover Labour will also face pressure on a second front and will find it almost impossible to appeal to both groups simultaneously. A rerun of the SDP split looks a distinct possibility to me.
I think a lot of what Labour were saying did chime with voters. I do think they did make a good point about the effects of the recovery not being felt by working people. I think they got a sympathetic ear about the 'tax cuts for the very richest' angle. And, as usual, they (probably unfairly) get a lot of kudos for banging the NHS drum.
But they couldn't convert the goodwill they received on the above points because they could not convince people that they were going to be able to safeguard the nations finances. That's the crux of it. And you need to be able to do this before people are going to vote for you on the basis of all the other issues. Ed saying he didn't think the last government spent too much sealed his doom.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
That depends on what happens in Scotland between now and 2020. If it is independent, then there is no issue - and the Tories will be the party that lost the Union; if it is not, the chances are that there will be a new constitutional settlement in place that will cause the SNP to have had a fundamental rethink about what kind of party it is, what it wants to achieve and how it governs in Edinburgh when voters directly associate its decisions with their taxes.
The other thing that also amazes me about this result is that in the 5 year run up it was all about the left being united by returning Red Liberals and the right being split by UKIP. But the left has been split by UKIP and the right has been united by Blue Liberals turning blue.
Anyone who thinks that Labour have a path to victory that only involved the centre ground is kidding themselves, they need to unite the left and see off the threat from UKIP much like the Tories had to do between 2012-2015. Ignoring UKIP and their appeal to WWC voters is suicide for Labour.
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.
Sounds like wishful thinking - beware what you wish for - another election anytime soon would finish labour and return a much increased majority conservative goverment
I don't think they'll be another election soon, but tbh you're thoughts (as well as some others on here) also sound like wishful thinking. It's one thing to think it'll be difficult for Labour to win in 2020, it's another to think they'll never win a GE again.
Not really - it is a distinct possibility and certainly only Lord Mandelson on Sky today seemed to talk any sense - labour are in denial
If we're taking the situation Labour win never get power again here is this: at some point people get fed up with the incumbent. The idea that the country will forever on elect Conservative governments goes against that pretty much timeless rule of politics.
The people will vote out the Conservatives, in 2020, 2025 or even 2030, that is indisputable. However the assumption that it will be the current Labour Party that replaces them is flawed. Never before has there been such a visible split in the Labour Party's voters - and the next leader will have to try and gain votes at the centre while not loosing too many on the left. There is the very real chance of a Labour schism by 2020.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
That's only true to the extent that this election makes it clear that tomorrow can be outside of the foreseeable future as far as working out if people can get majorities.
Labour didn't need Scotland in 1997 and 2001, and I'm pretty sure could have got a majority with the Lib Dems in 2005.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
IMHO Labour should disband its Scottish contingent, who should set up a new party (Social Unionists? Something like that?) that has a CSU-type relationship with the rUK party. Weve spoken about this for a long time as regards the Scottish Tories, but now I think all the major unionist parties could do with thinking about it.
Whatever name you give them Scottish MPs can vote on English matters in Westminster for which they have no mandate in Scotland. Giving all this advice to Labour is tiresome. They mucked up devolution in the first place and handled the referendum aftermath appallingly stupidly.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
That depends on what happens in Scotland between now and 2020. If it is independent, then there is no issue - and the Tories will be the party that lost the Union; if it is not, the chances are that there will be a new constitutional settlement in place that will cause the SNP to have had a fundamental rethink about what kind of party it is, what it wants to achieve and how it governs in Edinburgh when voters directly associate its decisions with their taxes.
I think this is why there is a huge opportunity for the LibDems. but it needs Ashdown-like willingness to play the long game (not a trait very much in vogue in our society, but that's a whole other issue).
I think time will show that the LibDems acted honourably in coalition and history will be kind to them. There is political capital to reap over the next 5 years to prevent an alternative with a genuinely alternative radical agenda, and the LibDems do well when they focus on slow, steady grass roots re-construction. When the current generation of students (who turned on them so viciously because of the tuition fees) have grown up a bit, they might be forgiven.
I may be hopelessly optimistic, and it may be wishful thinking, and it may take more than one government. The paradox for the LibDems are that they need time but don't have it. They will have to get their act together quickly because AFAICT they will be the only party who will be defending a no vote in an 'out of Europe' referendum...
It's the conservative way of life that many immigrants have in mind when they come here, I would have thought.
Yes, West African immigrants specifically will be Tory voting in the next 10 years. They are conservatively inclined and aspirational. Eastern Europeans as well IMO. As these groups integrate into British life and feel closer to a British identity they will follow the same path as those Indian who also don't vote Labour.
This idea that Labour can build a majority based on immigrant votes is not one that is realistic, it may have been in the pre-Dave era, but the Tories are not seen as a racist party thanks to his influence and UKIP. Yes, Labour may have more immigrant friendly instincts but immigrants are people like all others and have concerns beyond the colour of their skin and the country from which they originate. It is extremely patronising when Labour segregate people by those two attributes, me being brown and of Indian origin doesn't make me any less interested in the economy or want racial quotas. It is not going to work for them and if they push any harder to win the immigrant vote they will be waving goodbye to hundreds of seats in the North as UKIP begin to really eat into their working class vote.
Chuka is not the right guy.
Not that I think it should matter, but am I right in thinking the Tories now have more BAME MPs than Labour, and they had a lot more candidates than Labour this time around? And the Liberal Democrats, even before the kick in the balls, were really struggling to get people who weren't middle class white folk to stand for them.
It's the conservative way of life that many immigrants have in mind when they come here, I would have thought.
Yes, West African immigrants specifically will be Tory voting in the next 10 years. They are conservatively inclined and aspirational. Eastern Europeans as well IMO. As these groups integrate into British life and feel closer to a British identity they will follow the same path as those Indian who also don't vote Labour.
This idea that Labour can build a majority based on immigrant votes is not one that is realistic, it may have been in the pre-Dave era, but the Tories are not seen as a racist party thanks to his influence and UKIP. Yes, Labour may have more immigrant friendly instincts but immigrants are people like all others and have concerns beyond the colour of their skin and the country from which they originate. It is extremely patronising when Labour segregate people by those two attributes, me being brown and of Indian origin doesn't make me any less interested in the economy or want racial quotas. It is not going to work for them and if they push any harder to win the immigrant vote they will be waving goodbye to hundreds of seats in the North as UKIP begin to really eat into their working class vote.
Chuka is not the right guy.
Yep, I agree with much of that. Most people, of all colours and faiths, have the same aspirations, hopes and fears. If it was all about certain kinds of identity, then Labour would have lost in Tower Hamlets and Bradford East. And if Chuka is presented as the candidate to choose because he can deliver the ethnic minority vote, then he will lose in 2020 for that very reason.
In fact, it could well be that where identity politics does exist most strongly now is among the voters who moved from Labour to UKIP. In EdM they saw a man who had absolutely no understanding of, or interest in, them. A different leader could change that pretty rapidly - if it was the right man or woman. And that's another reason to ditch Chuka.
They will have to get their act together quickly because AFAICT they will be the only party who will be defending a no vote in an 'out of Europe' referendum...
Lab, Lib and very probably Con (the leadership at least) will be campaigning for "in".
MaxPB Absolutely nothing in that BES study contradicts what I have said at all, just because you do not automatically vote Labour does not mean you start voting Tory and even the Runneymede survey showed Indian voters the most Tory voting ethnic minority.
What that BES study does show is that 57% of Pakistani voters identify with Labour, 67% of Caribbean voters and 63% of Africans. Of course that identification will have declined since 1997 when Labour won a landslide and is now in opposition, but that mirrors the nation as a whole, ethnic minorities are still more Labour than average
The other thing that also amazes me about this result is that in the 5 year run up it was all about the left being united by returning Red Liberals and the right being split by UKIP. But the left has been split by UKIP and the right has been united by Blue Liberals turning blue.
Anyone who thinks that Labour have a path to victory that only involved the centre ground is kidding themselves, they need to unite the left and see off the threat from UKIP much like the Tories had to do between 2012-2015. Ignoring UKIP and their appeal to WWC voters is suicide for Labour.
Absolutely right. But there is no reason why a party cannot appeal to UKIP switchers as well as suburban centrists. To go after certain segments of the electorate only is just foolish.
WG MaxPB UKIP will always occupy the populist ground, Labour needs to win back moderate suburban voters and Liberals end of, the LDs will recover a little but they are not going to be the main party of the centre left after 2010
Can the Government now withdraw all support in terms of advertising those public sector positions it has in its gift, to The Guardian? And switch to having them listed online. High time that particular organ was kicked off a cliff.
Yes it could, and the next Labour government could impose political balance requirements on all newspapers: net losers, Conservatives.
It is the same with postal votes and party funding: the systems may not be ideal but they favour the Conservatives most, and then Labour, so change is never urgent. There are more Tory papers than Labour ones, but there are some Labour ones. Endanger the latter and there is no reason not to attack the former. It would be a pyrrhic victory.
It would merely be levelling the playing field - no other major newspapers would carry the ads either. If the Guardian can get enough readers and advertisers to keep it going, that's great, but it should not be state subsidised.
Labour (should it ever return to Government in its present form) will never be able to impose anything like what you suggest.
Do balance requirements not apply to ITV then? I think you'll find they do.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
More than that, Labour would be the obvious victims of such a swing.
If the camps in the referendum are In: Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, half the Tories, and Out: UKIP and the other half of the Tories, it presents a real trap for Labour to spend weeks showing off their most metropolitan, we know what's best for you, patronising side without realising that they are alienating their own electorate.
SO UKIP observers are socially conservative, anti immigration and economically populist, suburban middle class voters are socially liberal, more accepting of immigration and economically centrist, yes it is not impossible to balance the 2, but for a centre left party trying to win given a choice between the 2 the latter is the better one to follow
MaxPB Absolutely nothing in that BES study contradicts what I have said at all, just because you do not automatically vote Labour does not mean you start voting Tory and even the Runneymede survey showed Indian voters the most Tory voting ethnic minority.
What that BES study does show is that 57% of Pakistani voters identify with Labour, 67% of Caribbean voters and 63% of Africans. Of course that identification will have declined since 1997 when Labour won a landslide and is now in opposition, but that mirrors the nation as a whole, ethnic minorities are still more Labour than average
Agreed. I'll have to this shift in West-Africans, and several others voting Conservative before I believe it. It almost implies that if you are an aspirational person, and BME it's inevitable you'll vote Conservative in the future.
MaxPB Absolutely nothing in that BES study contradicts what I have said at all, just because you do not automatically vote Labour does not mean you start voting Tory and even the Runneymede survey showed Indian voters the most Tory voting ethnic minority.
What that BES study does show is that 57% of Pakistani voters identify with Labour, 67% of Caribbean voters and 63% of Africans. Of course that identification will have declined since 1997 when Labour won a landslide and is now in opposition, but that mirrors the nation as a whole, ethnic minorities are still more Labour than average
The Runnymede Trust is not to be trusted. They are no more than a leftist front.
The BES study shows that just 17% of Indian people identify with Labour down from a massive 77%. You can't ignore that, it is a massive warning sign to Labour if they try and play identity politics. Not only will they push more of the WWC vote to UKIP, they may not even win with immigrant voters.
I think you are seriously underestimating how much Labour needs to hold onto their Northern heartlands and how strong the Tories' hold on the shires is. Tony Blair won against a weak Tory party but still built his landslide on the Northern heartlands. In the US they have two party politics and there is no variation, if the Dems lose a voter group it goes to the GOP and vice versa. Over here Labour will lose different voter groups to different parties if they play identity politics to try and attract immigrant voters in bigger numbers. You are making a flawed comparison between British and US politics, we live in a multi-party country, the US is still just a two party state.
MaxPB The Tories did clearly lose votes to UKIP, they just replaced some with switchers from the Liberals, once an EU referendum has occurred, especially if a narrow IN with Cameron leading the IN campaign, UKIP will again be a headache for the Tories
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
'The other thing that also amazes me about this result is that in the 5 year run up it was all about the left being united by returning Red Liberals and the right being split by UKIP. But the left has been split by UKIP and the right has been united by Blue Liberals turning blue.'
Spot on, it was the Red Liberals that were returning en masse to Labour we were told was happening week after week plus the UKIP vote that was going to trash the Tory chances and unless the UKIP vote fell below 5% it was good night Tories.
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
What I've been surprised about, reading the reports of how the Con/Lab team's found out (i.e. by watching the telly with the rest of us) is that it seem's they genuinely do not get a "head's up" about what it's showing before 10pm?
The broadcasters must get given the result some time before 10pm so they can get their scripts and graphics ready, and whilst I know it's supposed to be kept entirely secret until 10pm I always assumed that at some point before 10pm the politicians would be informed about what it's saying...
But it seem's not.
But surely if they gave a 'heads up' they would not be able to confound the politicians and get moments like Ashdown promising to eat his hat.
MaxPB The Tories did clearly lose votes to UKIP, they just replaced some with switchers from the Liberals, once an EU referendum has occurred, especially if a narrow IN with Cameron leading the IN campaign, UKIP will again be a headache for the Tories
I don't think so. A large part of driver of the traditional Tory eurosceptic constituency is the feeling of, "No-one asked us about this. We weren't told the truth in 1975. This isn't what the people want." A referendum resulting in an IN vote would completely lance that boil and you would see the mainstream right pragmatically accepting the outcome.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Win him over... while trying to hide the elephant in the living room, the SNP.
What I've been surprised about, reading the reports of how the Con/Lab team's found out (i.e. by watching the telly with the rest of us) is that it seem's they genuinely do not get a "head's up" about what it's showing before 10pm?
The broadcasters must get given the result some time before 10pm so they can get their scripts and graphics ready, and whilst I know it's supposed to be kept entirely secret until 10pm I always assumed that at some point before 10pm the politicians would be informed about what it's saying...
But it seem's not.
But surely if they gave a 'heads up' they would not be able to confound the politicians and get moments like Ashdown promising to eat his hat.
Ashdown had the exit poll at that point, he just didn;t beleive it
'Well ahead' They are all within margin of error. Also, it isn't floating voters that Chuka will have trouble with - it's the traditional WWC miner's vote.
Also, you're trusting the polls - even after what transpired on Thursday.
Do we all agree that all ethnic minority and majority groups are inevitably becoming more Tory?
I don't think anything is inevitable. I do think if various groups have been overwhelmingly for one party the odds are they will become more balanced in the future because it defies reason that any group, comprised of people just like any other, would remain so committed to one shifting political faction, which in the case of Labour dominated groups does mean becoming more blue.
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
A most interesting post. And about time there was a Chinese MP, never mind the party in question.
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
Agreed. Really impressed by her - so that's two decent leadership candidates - Jarvis and Kendall. If Labour doesn't chose one of them they, they are an organisation that cannot be helped.
What I've been surprised about, reading the reports of how the Con/Lab team's found out (i.e. by watching the telly with the rest of us) is that it seem's they genuinely do not get a "head's up" about what it's showing before 10pm?
The broadcasters must get given the result some time before 10pm so they can get their scripts and graphics ready, and whilst I know it's supposed to be kept entirely secret until 10pm I always assumed that at some point before 10pm the politicians would be informed about what it's saying...
But it seem's not.
But surely if they gave a 'heads up' they would not be able to confound the politicians and get moments like Ashdown promising to eat his hat.
Ashdown had the exit poll at that point, he just didn;t beleive it
Harman knew it was true when she came on just after Ashdown.
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
A most interesting post. And about time there was a Chinese MP, never mind the party in question.
SLAB have achieved in 6 months what it took the Tories over 20 years to achieve. Couldn't believe what I was hearing when Chuka told Andrew Neil that he thought Jim Murphy had done an excellent job.
The current Labour leadership contenders are currently adopting a strategy of saying that Ed M and Jim Murphy are great people who did a fantastic job...but also that the party needs to fundamentally change itself, its policies and its messaging if it is to win again.
I know they don't want to criticise colleagues openly, and they were approving of the strategy until a few days ago, but I don't know that they are presenting a coherent message as a result, as that message makes no sense.
yes it makes them sound vacuous and self absorbed (which they probably are).If all they can do is say their own have done fantastic jobs when they clearly haven't it shows why the quiet majority of people don't vote for them.
The tablet of stone thing also proves the point in showing they are full of vague theory and no practicality and when it is combined with the arrogance of saying they will plant it in Downing Street it shows they are not a pleasant party at the top.
There is a need not to rub salt in wounds and show a bit of loyalty.
Chuka was vacuous. Mandy was venomous. It will be interesting to see how Liz Kendall handles it on Sunday Politics.
"Chuka was vacuous. Mandy was venomous." - no change there then
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
Agreed. Really impressed by her - so that's two decent leadership candidates - Jarvis and Kendall. If Labour doesn't chose one of them they, they are an organisation that cannot be helped.
Hear, hear. And excellent for my wallet, as I tipped these two months ago.
'The other thing that also amazes me about this result is that in the 5 year run up it was all about the left being united by returning Red Liberals and the right being split by UKIP. But the left has been split by UKIP and the right has been united by Blue Liberals turning blue.'
Spot on, it was the Red Liberals that were returning en masse to Labour we were told was happening week after week plus the UKIP vote that was going to trash the Tory chances and unless the UKIP vote fell below 5% it was good night Tories.
The exact opposite happened.
UKIP have moved from being anti EU to anti immigrant. Well not even that, its moved to anti muslim. The UKIP appeal has changed. I won't comment on what that appeal really is about or its consequences, but if that appeal is more to labour voters than tory then I am relieved and remain happy to be a conservative.
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
A most interesting post. And about time there was a Chinese MP, never mind the party in question.
There is now one, Alan Mak, though he plays down there being any significance to his origins.
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
bloody communists won't vote left wing :-)
They have experience of it...thats why they don't!!
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving her fiscal autonomy and then watching her bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
That said, it won't be a quick recovery in terms of seat's so I don't think we disagree on the idea of it taking Lab a generation to recover "up north".
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
I quite agree. However, we aren't likely Labour voters. The union leader Neil is talking to now probably doesn't agree.
From yesterday's thread where David Herdson wisely noted his error in originally thinking Jim Murphy was a good choice for Slab leader, I observed Herdson's law: Partisans must think carefully when offering advice to other parties, and those who fail to obey this law will tend to recommend that other parties shold be more like theirs. I am sure we all fall victim to this law if we have partisan affiliations (or positions on referendums, or so on).
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving them fiscal autonomy and then watching them bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
I can see a Conservative revival in Scotland far more readily than a Labour one. It was close, but the Cons almost gained a seat up there and held on to DCT in the wave of the SNP tsunami. The Conservatives differentiate from the SNP in a way that Labour simply don't now.
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
A most interesting post. And about time there was a Chinese MP, never mind the party in question.
Edit - never mind, didn't read post properly
Not a problem at all - I was pleased to see the link, thanks.
Also, to all the various lefties around the country calling for electoral reform because the Tories have a slim majority with 37% of the vote, were they saying the same in 2005 when Labour had a much larger majority with 35% of the vote and just a 2.8% lead over the next party?
Hypocrites, the lot of them. 13 years Labour had to implement electoral reform.
Quite - I support electoral reform, but the Tories weren't offering it and they won; they don't have a mandate to do it, let alone the desire. Of course, parties can change their minds after an election, but its hard at the moment to see why they would any time soon.
I do wonder if those protestors would have turned out in quite such numbers at a Labour government of some stripe. If they were genuinely about anti-austerity they certainly should have. Actually I don't wonder, because they wouldn't have.
Do you not remember the annual Take the City riots and the G20 one in 2009?
I remember those, one of my colleagues witnessed a policeman acting a tad too aggressively with a protester who said to much.
Same year the policeman pushed over that guy who died.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
Nicola's rise in Scotland has been slow and steady. She did a Granita-style deal with Salmond way back in 2004.
So lets adjust that for reality and the Tories are still ahead with floating voters, while Labour have just lost another 5% to UKIP from their core WWC vote.
I don't understand this obsession you have with Chuka, he is not the right guy. Jarvis or Kendall are much better shouts. I would go for Kendall, Labour need a strong female leader, they need someone who can speak to both aspirational Britain and working class Britain and they can finally put to rest the fact that the Tories have had a female leader and they haven't despite being the "progressive" party.
Small ethnographic point. The fastest growing non-EU demographic is the Chinese. Most UK Chinese used to be Cantonese HongKongers - the restaurant trade. Now the mainland provides the bulk of our Chinese immigrants. Students who never go home, etc. Some are monied. All have the Chinese hard work and socially conservative ethics. Labour is a foreign culture to them. Tories not so much. My wife is Chinese and we have many UK Chinese friends. They all voted Tory. The few that vote at all that is. A promising (and surprisingly numerous but politically invisible) group for the Tories to get interested more in politics. I note the new Tory 2015 MP intake includes the first Chinese MP. Good!
You're claiming a socialist Labour movement is a foreign culture to immigrants from the People's Republic of China?
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
She sounds normal that's a start
Didn't dodge or evade the questions either. Even promised Andrew Neill a selfie with the edstone if she sees it! (I suspect that she will conveniently never find it though).
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving them fiscal autonomy and then watching them bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
I can see a Conservative revival in Scotland far more readily than a Labour one. It was close, but the Cons almost gained a seat up there and held on to DCT in the wave of the SNP tsunami. The Conservatives differentiate from the SNP in a way that Labour simply don't now.
Wouldn't it be funny if Con got more Scottish seats than Lab!
Ruth Davidson is quite impressive I must admit and could provide the main opposition to Nicola while SLab tries to get their act together.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving them fiscal autonomy and then watching them bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
I can see a Conservative revival in Scotland far more readily than a Labour one. It was close, but the Cons almost gained a seat up there and held on to DCT in the wave of the SNP tsunami. The Conservatives differentiate from the SNP in a way that Labour simply don't now.
The Conservatives have 7 second places and one seat in Scotland. They also have a decent leader. The only missing bit is for the Nats to start screwing up, which is only a matter of time.
Polly continuing to munch on those sour grapes on Sunday Politics..
Indeed = entertaining as it is to watch Polly looking like a bulldog chewing a wasp, why does the BBC keep inviting the poisonous bitch on to Sunday politics when she just repeats the same script she’s been using for the past decade?
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
She already is a candidate. She had him eating out of the palm of her hand, despite him throwing her a few difficult questions.
Anyone who didn't see it should get it up on iplayer.
She is a winner. I just hope Labour is sensible enough to choose her (I have my doubts!)
Yep, you can usually count on Labour to find a way of getting it wrong.
Tbf, in 2010 Labour did try to get it right - both members and the parliamentary party voted for David Miliband - one more vote for D Miliband and he'd have been leader. It was really Labour's voting system and the unions which screwed them over.
So lets adjust that for reality and the Tories are still ahead with floating voters, while Labour have just lost another 5% to UKIP from their core WWC vote.
I don't understand this obsession you have with Chuka, he is not the right guy. Jarvis or Kendall are much better shouts. I would go for Kendall, Labour need a strong female leader, they need someone who can speak to both aspirational Britain and working class Britain and they can finally put to rest the fact that the Tories have had a female leader and they haven't despite being the "progressive" party.
Her chromosomes will count heavily in her favour, but her advantages do not end there!
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving them fiscal autonomy and then watching them bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
I can see a Conservative revival in Scotland far more readily than a Labour one. It was close, but the Cons almost gained a seat up there and held on to DCT in the wave of the SNP tsunami. The Conservatives differentiate from the SNP in a way that Labour simply don't now.
They just elected 56 MPs for a party whose platform was that Labour don't hate the Tories enough!
Polly continuing to munch on those sour grapes on Sunday Politics..
Indeed = entertaining as it is to watch Polly looking like a bulldog chewing a wasp, why does the BBC keep inviting the poisonous bitch on to Sunday politics when she just repeats the same script she’s been using for the past decade?
Q: Why are two effing Guardianista Labour supporting hacks on the BBC? A: Because its the house read of the BBC.
Of course somehow it meets the BBC impartiality rules........
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving them fiscal autonomy and then watching them bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
I can see a Conservative revival in Scotland far more readily than a Labour one. It was close, but the Cons almost gained a seat up there and held on to DCT in the wave of the SNP tsunami. The Conservatives differentiate from the SNP in a way that Labour simply don't now.
Once supporting separatists becomes more toxic to unionists than supporting milk snatchers then we'll see the Conservative revival properly get going. There is simply no point in supporting SLab right now.
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.
If he loses the EU ref he is gone. If he wins it I would expect him to leave on top, allow someone to take the divided party forward now the matter is settled, that sort of thing.
But perhaps rather than go immediately he says he'll go in a year or something, to give the party time to sort out candidates, and he'll throw his hat back into the ring 'reluctantly' when the public seems lukewarm to the other candidates and are calling for him to stay on. Assuming everything else is going positively for him, which is not certain of course.
No chance will he throw his hat back in the ring. He's already one of the longest serving Conservative party leaders ever. By the next election he won't have only been PM for a decade, but he'd have been Conservative Party leader for nearly 15 years. He needs to retire eventually and having said he will he won't go back on that.
Besides if he loses the referendum, he'll have to go as you said. If he wins it then he'll retire as a Prime Minister who won two elections and three major referendums - leading to the rejection of electoral reform, Scottish independence and EU exit. An incredible high for any PM to retire on rather than trying to go "on and on" like Thatcher and Blair only to be evicted by your own party like they both were, setting up divisions for years to come.
Paul Flynn MP: Labour needs leader who is an eloquent, charismatic personality strengthened by intellectual depth and debating skills. Chuka is my choice
Some of his past actions and comments will be used to hang him by the opposition.
Sneering at the working class might not be the best look for Labour.
Polly continuing to munch on those sour grapes on Sunday Politics..
Indeed = entertaining as it is to watch Polly looking like a bulldog chewing a wasp, why does the BBC keep inviting the poisonous bitch on to Sunday politics when she just repeats the same script she’s been using for the past decade?
Q: Why are two effing Guardianista Labour supporting hacks on the BBC? A: Because its the house read of the BBC.
Of course somehow it meets the BBC impartiality rules........
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
She sounds normal that's a start
Indeed - not only does she sounds normal, but she's prepared to admit there are problems within the party - about as far removed from the Hazel Blear mould of female Labour MP as you can get.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving them fiscal autonomy and then watching them bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
I can see a Conservative revival in Scotland far more readily than a Labour one. It was close, but the Cons almost gained a seat up there and held on to DCT in the wave of the SNP tsunami. The Conservatives differentiate from the SNP in a way that Labour simply don't now.
They just elected 56 MPs for a party whose platform was that Labour don't hate the Tories enough!
Sure, but that means its harder for SLAB to fight back, whereas if you are not SNP the Tories are the only option then, so the theory goes. As it is the Tory vote there seems remarkably stable, they are second in a number of seats, so like this time they could win 0-3 next time.
Labour are for the foreseeable future banjaxed by the SNP.
English voters essentially now have a binary choice.
Tories or... Lab+SNP
I think most English voters would rather stick pins in their eyes than countenance the second option.
It seems to me the next election will probably see the Tories returned with a majority similar to the one they have now.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Why on earth should Labour begin to recover in Scotland. None of the candidates is anywhere near close to Sturgeon. It's gone, for a generation. It is Nuneaton man they need to win over.
Because like most politicians that rise quickly, Nicola's fall will almost certainly be equally rapid.
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving her fiscal autonomy and then watching her bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
That said, it won't be a quick recovery in terms of seat's so I don't think we disagree on the idea of it taking Lab a generation to recover "up north".
There are already a few faultlines in the SNP which will be tough to manage.
1. Salmond he should have retired. The press will have a field day on who calls the shots Salmond/Sturgeon in SNP Salmond/Robertson at Westminster 2. They have expanded hugely in a short period of time the all things to all men will start to come under pressure 3. Indyref 2 versus bread and butter issues with the electorate 4. Tartan Tories versus Sturgeon Socialists
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
She already is a candidate. She had him eating out of the palm of her hand, despite him throwing her a few difficult questions.
Anyone who didn't see it should get it up on iplayer.
She is a winner. I just hope Labour is sensible enough to choose her (I have my doubts!)
Yep, you can usually count on Labour to find a way of getting it wrong.
The Conservatives can't talk. The party that elected Hague and then conspired to keep Portillo off the members' ballot which led to IDS being elected provides an object lesson in how not to do it.
Michael Howard got it right by overseeing a prolonged process and making sure Cameron had the right platform to build his profile.
Pulpstar Labour have already been massacred at Holyrood in 2011, tactical voting will be far higher at Holyrood than at Westminster where the aim is to stop an SNP majority not to elect a Tory or Labour government. The SNP will win, but as PR is also an element the division of the unionist parties will not be an issue on the second ballot and tactical voting will be far higher on the first
Liz Kendall is doing very well with Mr Neil on Sunday Politics. She'd be an excellent leadership candidate.
I quite agree. However, we aren't likely Labour voters. The union leader Neil is talking to now probably doesn't agree.
From yesterday's thread where David Herdson wisely noted his error in originally thinking Jim Murphy was a good choice for Slab leader, I observed Herdson's law: Partisans must think carefully when offering advice to other parties, and those who fail to obey this law will tend to recommend that other parties shold be more like theirs. I am sure we all fall victim to this law if we have partisan affiliations (or positions on referendums, or so on).
Interesting point. At a distance it seems to me that Scottish Labour needed and needs a tub-thumper, and in 2015 would have been better off with Gordon if he'd been willing. The Tories wouldn't have given him any tactical votes, but they don't anyway (what did fitalass vote, for all her sympathy for Jim?).
I was helping out in my local conservative constituency office about four weeks and it was hinted to me that we were probably going to get a majority and I should put on a bet. Needless to say, given the polls, I thought they were mad and declined. Now of course I am kicking myself. I wonder how many other people lost out because of the polls.
Watched some of the BBC election coverage and it was even worse than people on here were suggesting. The word dire is an understatement.
Here we are four days later and all I'm hearing is 'why did Labour lose.' I see the Labour narrative now is the tories and going to 'fragment' because of the EU referendum etc. It doesn't help David Davies hitting the airwaves but I personally don't think they will.
David Cameron needs to get off to a good start though and so far they seem to be staying off the media, which is a good idea. I don't think they are giving David Cameron enough credit for what must have been an exhausting campaign. He's been leader a long time and there is always the danger people get sick of seeing you.
SLAB have achieved in 6 months what it took the Tories over 20 years to achieve. Couldn't believe what I was hearing when Chuka told Andrew Neil that he thought Jim Murphy had done an excellent job.
The current Labour leadership contenders are currently adopting a strategy of saying that Ed M and Jim Murphy are great people who did a fantastic job...but also that the party needs to fundamentally change itself, its policies and its messaging if it is to win again.
I know they don't want to criticise colleagues openly, and they were approving of the strategy until a few days ago, but I don't know that they are presenting a coherent message as a result, as that message makes no sense.
yes it makes them sound vacuous and self absorbed (which they probably are).If all they can do is say their own have done fantastic jobs when they clearly haven't it shows why the quiet majority of people don't vote for them.
The tablet of stone thing also proves the point in showing they are full of vague theory and no practicality and when it is combined with the arrogance of saying they will plant it in Downing Street it shows they are not a pleasant party at the top.
There is a need not to rub salt in wounds and show a bit of loyalty.
There is no need to talk about the Liberal Democrats like that. Apparently, they did their "national duty". Sadly, no one remembered that !
Time for a name change ? Free Democrats anyone ? Free Liberals ?
New Liberals? your lot managed to con the voters for a while with that.
Comments
This idea that Labour can build a majority based on immigrant votes is not one that is realistic, it may have been in the pre-Dave era, but the Tories are not seen as a racist party thanks to his influence and UKIP. Yes, Labour may have more immigrant friendly instincts but immigrants are people like all others and have concerns beyond the colour of their skin and the country from which they originate. It is extremely patronising when Labour segregate people by those two attributes, me being brown and of Indian origin doesn't make me any less interested in the economy or want racial quotas. It is not going to work for them and if they push any harder to win the immigrant vote they will be waving goodbye to hundreds of seats in the North as UKIP begin to really eat into their working class vote.
Chuka is not the right guy.
However, the death of the Labour party is being greatly exaggerated. Led by the ridiculous Ed and against the backdrop of an economic recovery, the party did get 9.3 million votes. It is nowhere near enough, but it is 30% of the electorate. That is a base from which to start.
Any Labour rule book experts out there can clarify? Could have massive betting implications. Has EdM left a toxic legacy guaranteeing unions a more dominating influence?
Judging from their comments, Wilson and MacMillan understood this. Wilson talked about 'pragmatism'. MacMillan of course talked about 'events'.
But they couldn't convert the goodwill they received on the above points because they could not convince people that they were going to be able to safeguard the nations finances. That's the crux of it. And you need to be able to do this before people are going to vote for you on the basis of all the other issues. Ed saying he didn't think the last government spent too much sealed his doom.
Anyone who thinks that Labour have a path to victory that only involved the centre ground is kidding themselves, they need to unite the left and see off the threat from UKIP much like the Tories had to do between 2012-2015. Ignoring UKIP and their appeal to WWC voters is suicide for Labour.
Labour didn't need Scotland in 1997 and 2001, and I'm pretty sure could have got a majority with the Lib Dems in 2005.
I think Labour and the Lib-Dems will recover ***some*** seat's (Lab especially recovering in Scotland) but it won't be enough and the Tories will be starting from a higher point compared to where they are now (notionally)
So balancing it all out, Lab/Lib go up a bit, Con goes down a bit, SNP perhaps down quite a lot and Con finishes up with a very small majority.
The one caveat in this is whether theres a huge split in the Tory Party during the referendum and/or UKIP receive a similar boost, post referendum, to what the SNP has received.
If that happens all bet's are off (but let's keep in mind UKUIP damage Labour as well as the tories so even if England does swing strongly to UKIP after the referendum it's not necessarily good news for Lab...)
Giving all this advice to Labour is tiresome. They mucked up devolution in the first place and handled the referendum aftermath appallingly stupidly.
I think time will show that the LibDems acted honourably in coalition and history will be kind to them. There is political capital to reap over the next 5 years to prevent an alternative with a genuinely alternative radical agenda, and the LibDems do well when they focus on slow, steady grass roots re-construction. When the current generation of students (who turned on them so viciously because of the tuition fees) have grown up a bit, they might be forgiven.
I may be hopelessly optimistic, and it may be wishful thinking, and it may take more than one government. The paradox for the LibDems are that they need time but don't have it. They will have to get their act together quickly because AFAICT they will be the only party who will be defending a no vote in an 'out of Europe' referendum...
In fact, it could well be that where identity politics does exist most strongly now is among the voters who moved from Labour to UKIP. In EdM they saw a man who had absolutely no understanding of, or interest in, them. A different leader could change that pretty rapidly - if it was the right man or woman. And that's another reason to ditch Chuka.
What that BES study does show is that 57% of Pakistani voters identify with Labour, 67% of Caribbean voters and 63% of Africans. Of course that identification will have declined since 1997 when Labour won a landslide and is now in opposition, but that mirrors the nation as a whole, ethnic minorities are still more Labour than average
For the next 5 years voters up there will see the SNP rip into the Tories week after week, standing up for their interests.
Meanwhile Labour will elect another metropolitan twonk in a forlorn search for southern votes...
If the camps in the referendum are In: Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, half the Tories, and Out: UKIP and the other half of the Tories, it presents a real trap for Labour to spend weeks showing off their most metropolitan, we know what's best for you, patronising side without realising that they are alienating their own electorate.
Norman Lamb/Tristram Hunt could well be the best combo for the Lib Dems and worst for Labour.
The BES study shows that just 17% of Indian people identify with Labour down from a massive 77%. You can't ignore that, it is a massive warning sign to Labour if they try and play identity politics. Not only will they push more of the WWC vote to UKIP, they may not even win with immigrant voters.
I think you are seriously underestimating how much Labour needs to hold onto their Northern heartlands and how strong the Tories' hold on the shires is. Tony Blair won against a weak Tory party but still built his landslide on the Northern heartlands. In the US they have two party politics and there is no variation, if the Dems lose a voter group it goes to the GOP and vice versa. Over here Labour will lose different voter groups to different parties if they play identity politics to try and attract immigrant voters in bigger numbers. You are making a flawed comparison between British and US politics, we live in a multi-party country, the US is still just a two party state.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2826937/Ed-shadow-minister-plunges-dagger-Tristram-Hunt-joins-Labour-revolt-poll-says-Miliband-liability.html
'The other thing that also amazes me about this result is that in the 5 year run up it was all about the left being united by returning Red Liberals and the right being split by UKIP. But the left has been split by UKIP and the right has been united by Blue Liberals turning blue.'
Spot on, it was the Red Liberals that were returning en masse to Labour we were told was happening week after week plus the UKIP vote that was going to trash the Tory chances and unless the UKIP vote fell below 5% it was good night Tories.
The exact opposite happened.
As I read news articles about what happened on May 7-8, I still struggle to believe it.
while trying to hide the elephant in the living room, the SNP.
I was just thinking the exact same thing.
It's not just Labour that need to rebuild themselves.
Also, you're trusting the polls - even after what transpired on Thursday.
throwing their young into the cauldron isn't in Labour's long term interest
Anyone who didn't see it should get it up on iplayer.
She is a winner. I just hope Labour is sensible enough to choose her (I have my doubts!)
We can't say yet what will cause her to slip up (giving her fiscal autonomy and then watching her bankrupting Scotland within a couple of years might be a possibility) but after losing all but one seat the only way is up for Lab in Scotland surely?
That said, it won't be a quick recovery in terms of seat's so I don't think we disagree on the idea of it taking Lab a generation to recover "up north".
London and the SE ahead of the trend here.
Partisans must think carefully when offering advice to other parties, and those who fail to obey this law will tend to recommend that other parties shold be more like theirs.
I am sure we all fall victim to this law if we have partisan affiliations (or positions on referendums, or so on).
Same year the policeman pushed over that guy who died.
I don't understand this obsession you have with Chuka, he is not the right guy. Jarvis or Kendall are much better shouts. I would go for Kendall, Labour need a strong female leader, they need someone who can speak to both aspirational Britain and working class Britain and they can finally put to rest the fact that the Tories have had a female leader and they haven't despite being the "progressive" party.
Ruth Davidson is quite impressive I must admit and could provide the main opposition to Nicola while SLab tries to get their act together.
Indeed = entertaining as it is to watch Polly looking like a bulldog chewing a wasp, why does the BBC keep inviting the poisonous bitch on to Sunday politics when she just repeats the same script she’s been using for the past decade?
The whole lot > telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11492325/Matts-general-election-2015.html?frame=3296183
A: Because its the house read of the BBC.
Of course somehow it meets the BBC impartiality rules........
Besides if he loses the referendum, he'll have to go as you said. If he wins it then he'll retire as a Prime Minister who won two elections and three major referendums - leading to the rejection of electoral reform, Scottish independence and EU exit. An incredible high for any PM to retire on rather than trying to go "on and on" like Thatcher and Blair only to be evicted by your own party like they both were, setting up divisions for years to come.
Sneering at the working class might not be the best look for Labour.
Ashton already producing a string of hackneyed cliches...
1. Salmond he should have retired. The press will have a field day on who calls the shots Salmond/Sturgeon in SNP Salmond/Robertson at Westminster
2. They have expanded hugely in a short period of time the all things to all men will start to come under pressure
3. Indyref 2 versus bread and butter issues with the electorate
4. Tartan Tories versus Sturgeon Socialists
Not an easy hand to manage.
Michael Howard got it right by overseeing a prolonged process and making sure Cameron had the right platform to build his profile.
Watched some of the BBC election coverage and it was even worse than people on here were suggesting. The word dire is an understatement.
Here we are four days later and all I'm hearing is 'why did Labour lose.' I see the Labour narrative now is the tories and going to 'fragment' because of the EU referendum etc. It doesn't help David Davies hitting the airwaves but I personally don't think they will.
David Cameron needs to get off to a good start though and so far they seem to be staying off the media, which is a good idea. I don't think they are giving David Cameron enough credit for what must have been an exhausting campaign. He's been leader a long time and there is always the danger people get sick of seeing you.