That's why Dave's successor has to be a One Nation Tory, to appeal to all those disgruntled Blairites and left of centre social liberals.
Precisely.
I don't buy it most of those sort of people, and quite a lot of the LDs around here are running around saying how right-wing Cameron is, complete balls of course, but if that is their perception, we wont get their vote. Labour is more likely to split with the Blairites drifting toward the LDs, the Old Labour types joining the kippers, and the rest sitting on their hands. In the same way in 1997 the metropolitan liberal Tories voted for Blair and quite a lot of the rest sat on their hands.
As someone who did some canvassing it was the Lib Dems that won the election for the Tories.
Going into coalition with the Lib Dems was the final stage of the detoxification strategy for Dave and the Tories.
If Labour keep on putting up duffers as leaders, and the Tories occupy the centre-right ground, then all things being equal, the Tories should do well.
The two (or technically four) key stats from the election that are truly astonishing.
UKIP up 9.5% and the Tories up 0.8%
Lib Dems down 15.2% and Labour only up by 1.5%
The "plague on all your houses" voters decamped en mass from the Lib Dems to UKIP - what happens to them at the next election could be critical.
I think it more likely that many tactical LibDems moved back to Labour, and many old Labour moved to UKIP. That also explains the statistics and seems more reasonable.
I can see the tactical ex-LibDems coming back to LibDems in LibDem marginals removing the Tory majority and not impacting Labour seats. I can also see ex-Old Labour leaving UKIP (after the referendum is done and dusted) attracted by a more left wing traditional Labour party.
If you want to give me your tactical voting estimates then I'll run it through my election database and report back this afternoon. 1. % of Lab/UKIP/Green vote switching to LibDem 2. % of UKIP vote switching back to Labour
Small changes can sometimes have profound effects.
1. In CON/LD marginals I could see the Lab vote being resqueezed back to half the 2015 number, i.e. 50% of LAB switching to LDs (but only in CON/LD marginals). 2. I could see 30% of the UKIP vote switching back to LAB.
Thanks Barnesian - I'll get cracking on crunching the numbers. See you later.
That's why Dave's successor has to be a One Nation Tory, to appeal to all those disgruntled Blairites and left of centre social liberals.
The next leader also has to appeal to the 13% that voted UKIP and the many working class Labour voters that will be put off by Corbyn's pro-immigration, pro-Hamas, pro-IRA, anti-monarchy position.
We won without that great unwashed mob, we don't need them.
It does need to appeal to that part of UKIP which might be considered Conservative. eg those like Carswell. We can be that broad a church. Those form a relatively small part of 13%. A good chunk are no better in their own way than the fruit loop Corbynites and the less said about the white sheet brigade the better. 3 - 5% can be reasoned with.
This is the sort of snobbishness that puts off many UKIP supporters from voting for us. While every party has its extremists, there is nothing in UKIP's manifesto as extreme as Corbyn's more batty ideas. In many cases these people are both socially and economically conservative: they want to get benefits under control, encourage people to get on in life, control immigration and protect British interest abroad. They will be much easier to win back then that are hardcore supporters of Tony Blair, who was hostile to many conservative beliefs.
A snob? Moi? As I pointed put there are I suspect 3-5% out of UKIP's 12.7% that would make perfectly reasonable Conservative voters. 37% is nowhere near big enough for the tory vote share. The tory party is a broad based coalition. It should be aspiring to at least 43% in an election. The conservative govt is pursuing pension and welfare reform. The broad base of the tory party can be said to be economically conservative and is socially very central these days - in this it reflects the changes in UK society. Its pursuing reform in the EU and offered a referendum. It is clearly embarked on cutting back the state. However I for one am not fooled, there is a significant chunk of the UKIP vote which is clearly analogous to the Corbynite cult and cannot be reasoned with. The very act of being seen to even try would be damaging.
The process does look a bit shambolic, but democracy in political parties does tend to. At least the main objective of getting more people involved has worked, even if the result wasn't quite what the architects of the system was envisaging. The alternative of letting the activist base shrink and relying on wealthy donors to fund things would have looked much better in the short run. But given how well the Tories are doing following that model, there probably isn't much room for a competitor for available funds.
If they are ambitious - and many MPs are not content to stay on the back benches - then there will be no progress for them under a Corbyn party. At least, unless they do a Palmeresque damescene conversion, which holds its own dangers.
The possibility of the Labour party splitting once more is increasing. They'd remain as MPs, but in a separate party. It'll be the SDP all over again. Or join the Lib Dems.
If they are ambitious then their ambitions for office may be delayed in their realisation. However, there is plenty of space in the PLP for those that disagree with the leadership, look at Corbyn, and the wheel might turn again. But if they leave then the experience of the SDP suggests that their career in politics will be short. Better, surely, to keep taking the cash and the freebies, it is not as if they actually have to work for them.
Yep. Corbyn is surely the primest example that you can hold views that one would think were irreconcilable with remaining in a party under specific leadership, and yet remain with very little difficulty depending on your level of personal ambition and patience.
If Corbyn is a disaster then they'll have an opportunity to be present at the counter-reformation, if he isn't they can try to join in, bunker down or get out. All more plausible than leaving outright by defecting somewhere or splitting and probably losing election and your connections.
Bugger, bugger, bugger, looks like we're not getting another Indyref until after 2020
A second independence referendum should not be held before 2020, warn senior SNP sources, because there is still too much uncertainty that the public would support Scotland leaving the United Kingdom
Bugger, bugger, bugger, looks like we're not getting another Indyref until after 2020
A second independence referendum should not be held before 2020, warn senior SNP sources, because there is still too much uncertainty that the public would support Scotland leaving the United Kingdom
Comments
FTSE 350 down
Dax 600 down
Carnage!!!
Dow said to be opening down 700 points or so. Can the Corbyn disease be catching world wide?
As I pointed put there are I suspect 3-5% out of UKIP's 12.7% that would make perfectly reasonable Conservative voters. 37% is nowhere near big enough for the tory vote share. The tory party is a broad based coalition. It should be aspiring to at least 43% in an election.
The conservative govt is pursuing pension and welfare reform. The broad base of the tory party can be said to be economically conservative and is socially very central these days - in this it reflects the changes in UK society. Its pursuing reform in the EU and offered a referendum. It is clearly embarked on cutting back the state.
However I for one am not fooled, there is a significant chunk of the UKIP vote which is clearly analogous to the Corbynite cult and cannot be reasoned with. The very act of being seen to even try would be damaging.
If Corbyn is a disaster then they'll have an opportunity to be present at the counter-reformation, if he isn't they can try to join in, bunker down or get out. All more plausible than leaving outright by defecting somewhere or splitting and probably losing election and your connections.
Then it would be 'game over' for the Nats and petitions to change the name to 'North Britain'......