Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If UKIP can’t crack FPTP soon it’ll find itself almost without

SystemSystem Posts: 11,694
edited February 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If UKIP can’t crack FPTP soon it’ll find itself almost without elected reps when current MEP terms end

Once again an election for a Westminster seat has highlighted the struggle UKIP has with first past the post elections. Even though it was placed third in terms of national vote share at GE2015 it only managed one of the 650 MPs. That was, of course, Carswell’s Clacton seat which he’d won in the 2014 by election when he’d stood as a defector incumbent.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Nutall is a disaster for UKIP. No flowers.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    Another new thread?
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    Third like Suzanne Evans in the next UKIP leadership election.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Another new thread?

    Editorial confusion. Mea culpa.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    edited February 2017
    Freds are coming thick and fast this morning !

    UKIP has an existential problem, May has knicked their clothes and is wearing them much better than the actual UKIP.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,194

    Sandpit said:

    Another new thread?

    Editorial confusion. Mea culpa.
    You are a total shambles. You're fired!
  • Options
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another new thread?

    Editorial confusion. Mea culpa.
    You are a total shambles. You're fired!
    Sad
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927

    Sandpit said:

    Another new thread?

    Editorial confusion. Mea culpa.
    The last one just went 404. Wrong thread deleted!
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2017
    Paul Nuttall's performance was ideal from the point of view of the other parties; poor enough to damage UKIP's morale and stop them building any momentum, and to brand him a loser, but not so disastrous that he's likely to step down.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    I would say UKIP were a bit unlucky for their big chance to come at a time when the government are capable of making by election gains; unprecedented circumstances. I expected Con 2015 voters to go to UKIP in Stoke, but they didn't; in that respect the Cons performance there was almost as good as that in Copeland.

    Equally I am surprised, given the grim, downbeat, doom laden depiction we saw of Stoke and its "let down by politicians" electorate on tv that they voted for more of the same.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    FPT:

    That Dimbleby surge in full -

    UK - By-Elections / Copeland By Election - Winner Conservatives Back x 23-Feb-17
    23:18 C 1.75 100.00 1.75 75.49
    UK - By-Elections / Copeland By Election - Winner Conservatives Back x 23-Feb-17
    23:16 C 2.02 85.00 2.02 86.70
    UK - By-Elections / Copeland By Election - Winner Conservatives Back x 23-Feb-17
    23:16 C 2.08 35.00 2.08 37.80
    UK - By-Elections / Copeland By Election - Winner Conservatives Back x 23-Feb-17
    23:16 C 2.08 28.00 2.08 30.24
    UK - By-Elections / Copeland By Election - Winner Labour Lay x 23-Feb-17
    23:15 C 1.93 5.00 1.93 5.00
    UK - By-Elections / Copeland By Election - Winner Conservatives Back x 23-Feb-17
    23:15 C 2.08 4.00 2.08 4.32
  • Options
    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.
  • Options
    Bah, my subtle attempt to plant an earworm has been lost to posterity.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,534
    edited February 2017

    Bah, my subtle attempt to plant an earworm has been lost to posterity.

    It'll be back.

    And it is still available on the vanilla forums

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/1449482/#Comment_1449482
  • Options
    BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    UKIP and Lib Dems going nowhere fast under their current leaders. They can look to the past (Farage and Clegg) to improve things in the short term but ultimately they both suffer from a lack of credible leadership options.
  • Options

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Yes. I'll repost this from last night.

    isam said:

    Nothing will ever change, we are stuck forever. Labour really couldn't have put out a worse candidate, he insulted the voters but they still voted for him.

    I am beginning to wish we had voted Remain! At least we would have still had light at the end of the tunnel

    Why would Labour voters switch to a party that is to the right of the Tories?

    Thought experiment. It is the 1980s again.

    Switch the following party labels.

    Labour => Tories

    UKIP => SDP

    Tories => Labour

    What would all the commentators say based on the Stoke result?

    Split left-wing lets Tories through on barely one third of the vote in what is clearly a left-leaning seat.

    If you buy the idea that Ukip is the right-winger's right-wing party, would you say Stoke was a firmly right-wing seat where a split on the right has let the Labour party sneak through?

    I'm not buying that. There is some truth in working-class kipper potential and in Ukip being more subtle to pin down on the political spectrum given its special ability for incoherence (with its trump card super-power of clearly never having to put any of its proposals into practice and seeing how well they work once in power, which adds enviable flexibility to the pledges they can make).

    Thing is, tapping into this potential working-class support and making a winning coalition out of it, will take more than a scouse accent.

    I also agreed with SO's reply.


    UKIP needs a leadership and a membership who are credibly left wing on certain touchstone issues - the NHS, trade unions, housing etc. What Kate Hoey represents in terms of belief system. But the vast majority of the membership are ex-Tories, like Farage, Nuttall, Evans and so on.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
  • Options
    Still plenty of Corbynistas about by the looks of the comments on this article:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/24/jeremy-corbyn-labour-copeland-stoke-leader

    e.g.

    "There is only one person who broke the Labour Party.

    That person is Tony Blair.

    Labour's landslide victory in 1997 was won on a left wing prospectus which included the introduction of the minimum wage, a massive investment in public services and education and a tax on "excessive profits".

    As the country was heading left after 18 years of Conservative corruption and incompetence, the politically tin eared Blair dragged the party to the right.

    In the process he lost Labour 5,000,000 votes, Scotland, and, most importantly, the trust of the public. That loss of trust was also largely responsible for Labour losing the last two General Elections.

    And losing Copeland of course.

    But in fairness to Blair, in 1997 he did win Labour the votes of a couple of hundred thousand staunch Tories.

    Credit where credit is due."
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Pulpstar said:

    Freds are coming thick and fast this morning !

    UKIP has an existential problem, May has knicked their clothes and is wearing them much better than the actual UKIP.

    Agreed May has taken them to the cleaners.
  • Options
    Incidentally, Brereton, the Stoke Tory candidate, seemed to be pretty assured and good on TV. I suspect we have not heard that last of this young candidate.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Brom said:

    UKIP and Lib Dems going nowhere fast under their current leaders. They can look to the past (Farage and Clegg) to improve things in the short term but ultimately they both suffer from a lack of credible leadership options.

    It's an interesting point. We're living in a de facto presidential system. If you don’t have a credible leader you're toast.

    What's odd is that the parties can't respond to it.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    FPT, for @AndyJS

    It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.

    The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958

    Incidentally, Brereton, the Stoke Tory candidate, seemed to be pretty assured and good on TV. I suspect we have not heard that last of this young candidate.

    Holding up vote share like that in a supposed 2 horse race was very very impressive. I wonder if those 80 or so votes might just cost Stoke Central as a Con gain at the next GE.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960

    Paul Nuttall's performance was ideal from the point of view of the other parties; poor enough to damage UKIP's morale and stop them building any momentum, and to brand him a loser, but not so disastrous that he's likely to step down.

    If one were trying to find a glimmer of light for UKIP, they still came 2nd when their purpose has been achieved.
  • Options
    JasonJason Posts: 1,614
    Surely May has to try and engineer an election after triggering A50? The Tories will never get a better opportunity to destroy the Labour party in its current state.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031
    Sandpit said:

    FPT, for @AndyJS

    It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.

    The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.

    What about the Conservative MPs voting down their own government on a No Confidence motion? As Labour would not be able to get a confidence motion passed, then after two weeks the Queen would have to call elections.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Yes. I'll repost this from last night.

    isam said:

    Nothing will ever change, we are stuck forever. Labour really couldn't have put out a worse candidate, he insulted the voters but they still voted for him.

    I am beginning to wish we had voted Remain! At least we would have still had light at the end of the tunnel

    Why would Labour voters switch to a party that is to the right of the Tories?

    Thought experiment. It is the 1980s again.

    Switch the following party labels.

    Labour => Tories

    UKIP => SDP

    Tories => Labour

    What would all the commentators say based on the Stoke result?

    Split left-wing lets Tories through on barely one third of the vote in what is clearly a left-leaning seat.

    If you buy the idea that Ukip is the right-winger's right-wing party, would you say Stoke was a firmly right-wing seat where a split on the right has let the Labour party sneak through?

    I'm not buying that. There is some truth in working-class kipper potential and in Ukip being more subtle to pin down on the political spectrum given its special ability for incoherence (with its trump card super-power of clearly never having to put any of its proposals into practice and seeing how well they work once in power, which adds enviable flexibility to the pledges they can make).

    Thing is, tapping into this potential working-class support and making a winning coalition out of it, will take more than a scouse accent.

    I also agreed with SO's reply.


    UKIP needs a leadership and a membership who are credibly left wing on certain touchstone issues - the NHS, trade unions, housing etc. What Kate Hoey represents in terms of belief system. But the vast majority of the membership are ex-Tories, like Farage, Nuttall, Evans and so on.

    UKIP can only replace Labour in the North if they change like the SNP. The SNP arguably had a more Socialist agenda than Labour. It is precisely because of that they are losing votes to the Tories and the Liberals in non-independence elections.

    UKIPers are mostly like Trumpers. Hating foreigners is their number one and sometimes only obsession.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    Jason said:

    Surely May has to try and engineer an election after triggering A50? The Tories will never get a better opportunity to destroy the Labour party in its current state.
    No, May has Brexit to deliver.

    If anyone wants 11-4 on there being a GE this year I'll lay up to a total of £200 liability for myself.
  • Options
    Jason said:

    Surely May has to try and engineer an election after triggering A50? The Tories will never get a better opportunity to destroy the Labour party in its current state.

    Labour will still be the opposition whenever the election is called. It will not be destroyed. Now, May faces three years of Corbyn asking her ineffectual questions and offering absolutely no opposition. If there were an election, she might get more seats, but Labour would also get a new leader and, quite possibly, a much stronger operation overall - even with just 150 MPs. As things stand, the Tories are in power until at least 2025. If there were an early GE, that timeline may well shorten.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898

    Corbyn says Labour winning Stoke was a turning point in British politics. I think he's right, but not in the way he meant it.

    A generous interpretation to say the least.
    AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    David Dimbleby was last night's unsung hero.

    He allowed me to shift ~ £240 profit over to the Tories in Copeland at what I considered fair odds. What a superstar that man is.

    Yes, but why on earth did he say it? Someone must have fed him the information, it's not the sort of thing you just say at random.
    Very specific verbal tic?

    AGreed with others, Labour will not be destroyed. Too sick to win, too stubborn to die. But where there's life there is hope!
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited February 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT, for @AndyJS

    It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.

    The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.

    What about the Conservative MPs voting down their own government on a No Confidence motion? As Labour would not be able to get a confidence motion passed, then after two weeks the Queen would have to call elections.
    But surely the PM has to resign after a vote of no confidence in her government? Do the Tories then also vote for no confidence in Philip Hammond, or at some point does HM have to call for Jeremy Corbyn, who would then be PM for six weeks through the election period? It would be a constitutional mess.

    The FTPA is like the Dangerous Dogs Act - it's clear what it was trying to do, but the way it's written has a whole pile of unintended consequences.

    I'd love to see May go down the vote in the Commons route though, would be bloody hilarious to watch the Official Opposition (Government-in-Waiting) vote against an election!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898

    Bloody hell

    htt://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/835081471572463617

    Legitimately mad.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,194
    nunu said:
    Going on what Cummings wrote, this isn't much of a surprise.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,194
    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Hartlepool.
  • Options
    Not a surprise. This is a cult and they will cut their own throats and then burn down the church before they admit to themselves that the anointed one is useless fraud.
  • Options
    JenSJenS Posts: 91
    Actually, Corbyn's carefully prepared quote seems to me to fall well short of a commitment to fight on indefinitely.

    "When he was asked if he would resign in the light of the fact that Labour’s share of the vote has been falling in a series of byelections now, he ruled out the proposal. He replied:

    'I was elected to lead this party. I was elected to lead this party to oppose austerity, to oppose the redistribution of wealth in the wrong direction, which is what this government is doing. We will continue our campaigning work on the NHS, on social care, on housing.' "


    I assume McDonnell wrote it for him.

  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Hartlepool.
    Maybe with a local candidate. Liverpool is down south from up here
  • Options

    Jason said:

    Surely May has to try and engineer an election after triggering A50? The Tories will never get a better opportunity to destroy the Labour party in its current state.

    Labour will still be the opposition whenever the election is called. It will not be destroyed. Now, May faces three years of Corbyn asking her ineffectual questions and offering absolutely no opposition. If there were an election, she might get more seats, but Labour would also get a new leader and, quite possibly, a much stronger operation overall - even with just 150 MPs. As things stand, the Tories are in power until at least 2025. If there were an early GE, that timeline may well shorten.

    Bring on the by-elections!! Surely a few other Lab MPs are looking at the 'public sector vacancies' on Guardian website.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
  • Options
    David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 6,506
    edited February 2017



    Matt Singh ‎@MattSingh_
    My understanding is still that #Copeland close in on the day voting, but postals probably put the Tories over the line #CopelandByElection


    Postal votes rule. OK.
  • Options
    EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    "A total of more than £32m was spent on the campaign - with the Leave side funded by donations totalling £16.4m, outgunning the Remain side's £15.1m."

    Let's not forget the £9m+ the government spent helping the Remain campaign.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,898

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not much better for them under AV is it?

    Like the Cromwell avatar
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927

    Not a surprise. This is a cult and they will cut their own throats and then burn down the church before they admit to themselves that the anointed one is useless fraud.
    I'd call them a bunch of cults, if I were a sensible Labour member.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,194
    Freggles said:

    tlg86 said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Hartlepool.
    Maybe with a local candidate. Liverpool is down south from up here
    I voted for Phillip Broughton in the last but one Ukip leadership election - hopefully he stands again in Hartlepool.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Bloody hell

    htt://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/835081471572463617

    Legitimately mad.
    Indeed, the inability to accept reality is the defining quality of Momentum, there will always be someone, or something to blame, if the desired result fails to materialise.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    Whoa.

    Boeing to invest in Sheffield !!!
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not much better for them under AV is it?

    Like the Cromwell avatar
    My Republican tendencies are being awoken.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2943583/prince-charles-backs-mad-plan-to-sterilise-grey-squirrels-to-protect-rare-reds/
  • Options
    nunununu Posts: 6,024
    More garbage from Farage.

    During 2015, the year in which Sweden took the largest number of asylum seekers, the number of reported sex crimes and rapes actually decreased by 11% and 12% respectively compared with 2014 - 18,100 sex offences were reported to the police, of which 5,920 were classified as rape.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39056786
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Whoa.

    Boeing to invest in Sheffield !!!

    You'll upset the locals, Catcliffe is in Rotherham
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT, for @AndyJS

    It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.

    The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.

    What about the Conservative MPs voting down their own government on a No Confidence motion? As Labour would not be able to get a confidence motion passed, then after two weeks the Queen would have to call elections.
    But surely the PM has to resign after a vote of no confidence in her government? Do the Tories then also vote for no confidence in Philip Hammond, or at some point does HM have to call for Jeremy Corbyn, who would then be PM for six weeks through the election period? It would be a constitutional mess.

    The FTPA is like the Dangerous Dogs Act - it's clear what it was trying to do, but the way it's written has a whole pile of unintended consequences.

    I'd love to see May go down the vote in the Commons route though, would be bloody hilarious to watch the Official Opposition (Government-in-Waiting) vote against an election!
    Mrs May would resign as Prime Minister, but remain as leader of the Conservative Party. The Queen would ask Mrs May (as leader of the largest party in the Commons) if she had the confidence of the House of Commons, and she would say she did not. The Queen would then ask Mr Corbyn, who would likely say that he did not. (Although it would be entertaining if he said he did, and then failed to get his Queen's speech passed.)
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,867
    It all goes to show what a good result Brexit was for the Conservatives. Had it gone 52/48 the other way, the Tories would now be in turmoil, and UKIP would be riding high.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


  • Options
    FPT
    That's quite interesting. It does suggest that trade union support for Corbyn is not absolute, but dependent upon him showing that he can somehow turn this dire situation around (not that he will). But if that is typical it also shows that his support base is, for the moment, still intact.

    Take that, together with the frankly delusional reaction to the results were seeing from the nailed on Corbynites, and everything still suggests that Corbyn still needs to be given a bit more rope - Autumn 2018, with the potential for a new leader to have much the same effect as the successor to Thatcher had on the Tory vote from 1990 to 1992. Nick Palmer is the sort of person that might be used as a barometer - i.e. a Labour member capable of changing their mind who needs to see the light before a challenge stands more than a remote chance. He hasn't, yet, from what I can glean.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,151
    edited February 2017
    The Stoke technique is worth a shot at the GE. The trick is to start the parliament with a large majority, so that after Corbyn loses a chunk of his voters to the Tories he still has a majority.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    UKIP a bit like Leicester City ?

    Nowhere to go after EU exit or winning the Prem.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,194
    Sean_F said:

    It all goes to show what a good result Brexit was for the Conservatives. Had it gone 52/48 the other way, the Tories would now be in turmoil, and UKIP would be riding high.

    I think we need one of Mr Herdson's alternative histories! Having not had much attention during the campaign, Dave's deal would have come under a lot of scrutiny in the months that followed.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Nutall was a gift to Labour. Makes Corbyn look like a statesman.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,031
    Sean_F said:

    It all goes to show what a good result Brexit was for the Conservatives. Had it gone 52/48 the other way, the Tories would now be in turmoil, and UKIP would be riding high.

    Brexit was a great result for the Conservatives and good one for the LibDems.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    I thought Trudy Harrison's first post win interview was very impressive. A bit of a below the radar campaign in terms of general press, but you need to have something about you to achieve such an impressive victory.
    Can see why she appealed on the doorstep, and will go far I think.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    I interpret the Prentis tweet as win in May or go.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    edited February 2017
    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    UKIP a bit like Leicester City ?

    Nowhere to go after EU exit or winning the Prem.
    Shrewd old Nigel knew the time to get out.. at the top!

    I do recall saying once or twice that if he went, UKIP would go to pot, a la a long serving manager at a football club... The haters said they'd flourish without him!
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,534
    edited February 2017
    Email from Andrew Hawkins of ComRes

    What can we glean from yesterday’s by-election results?

    1. The Conservatives are markedly more popular in 2017 under Theresa May than they were in 2015 under David Cameron.

    2. Liberal Democrat fortunes are slowly reviving, with the Party’s improved Stoke and Copeland performances reinforced by recent notable council by-election wins. On the present trend this is likely to have a significant impact on the number of Lib Dem MPs elected in 2010 and especially on those parts of the country (like the South West) where the Conservatives won big in 2015 but with soft majorities.

    3. UKIP’s performance in Stoke will be greeted with dismay by the Party as it confirms a pattern of poor post-Referendum results. Stoke should have seen a result for UKIP eclipsing those of the Heywood & Middleton and Eastleigh by-elections where the Party came second. The clock is ticking for Paul Nuttall.

    4. Most significantly of all, however, it is hard to see how Labour has any current prospect of victory in 2020. The Party is squeezed from all sides: the Conservatives will benefit from UKIP’s post-Referendum existential threat; Scotland has been lost to the SNP; and the Liberal Democrats are eating away at Labour’s centrist vote base.

    In the first three years of the 2010 to 2015 Parliament there were 12 by-elections in England and Wales. Labour’s average improvement in vote share on their 2010 performance was just over 5% points (even including Bradford West which was contested by George Galloway and where Labour lost 20% of their vote share).

    Since the 2015 General Election there have been 10 by-elections. Excluding Batley & Spen, Labour’s average performance finds them losing vote share and in the five most recent of these the average loss exceeds 5% points. That is an execrable performance for the Opposition.

    In the mid-1990s I headed up the political research unit for a polling company providing data to a Conservative Party that knew it was heading for disaster. I realised that in such circumstances, fuelled by self-delusion and self-preservation, political parties are almost always incapable of changing their trajectory. The Labour Party seems to be facing a similar fate.
  • Options
    Looks to me like UKIP will fracture post Brexit to NOTA, the Mayite Tories and a Ballsite type Labour, assuming Labour have the sense to move in that direction.
  • Options
    Sean_F said:

    It all goes to show what a good result Brexit was for the Conservatives. Had it gone 52/48 the other way, the Tories would now be in turmoil, and UKIP would be riding high.

    For now, the Tory wars are over.
  • Options

    FPT

    That's quite interesting. It does suggest that trade union support for Corbyn is not absolute, but dependent upon him showing that he can somehow turn this dire situation around (not that he will). But if that is typical it also shows that his support base is, for the moment, still intact.

    Take that, together with the frankly delusional reaction to the results were seeing from the nailed on Corbynites, and everything still suggests that Corbyn still needs to be given a bit more rope - Autumn 2018, with the potential for a new leader to have much the same effect as the successor to Thatcher had on the Tory vote from 1990 to 1992. Nick Palmer is the sort of person that might be used as a barometer - i.e. a Labour member capable of changing their mind who needs to see the light before a challenge stands more than a remote chance. He hasn't, yet, from what I can glean.

    Yep - 2018 has always looked the likely time to me. That said, the Copeland result confirms the opinion poll ratings. If the same thing happens at the May council elections, it could just be that things get brought forward. And, of course, if there is a miracle and McCluskey loses the Unite leadership, then it is game over.

    I think Nick will be a Corbyn supporter until the day after Corbyn is no longer leader; at which point he will say that he was always the wrong man for the job :-)
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2017
    isam said:

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though

    I think the overwhelming likelihood is that UKIP will become a fringe party rather like the BNP used to be in electoral terms, i.e. persist as a receptacle for 'Sod 'em all' votes, getting a small but not derisory percentage in a number of seats, epecially in run-down areas. (I'm not, of course, saying they'll be like the BNP in terms of unpleasantness).
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited February 2017
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT, for @AndyJS

    It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.

    The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.

    What about the Conservative MPs voting down their own government on a No Confidence motion? As Labour would not be able to get a confidence motion passed, then after two weeks the Queen would have to call elections.
    But surely the PM has to resign after a vote of no confidence in her government? Do the Tories then also vote for no confidence in Philip Hammond, or at some point does HM have to call for Jeremy Corbyn, who would then be PM for six weeks through the election period? It would be a constitutional mess.

    The FTPA is like the Dangerous Dogs Act - it's clear what it was trying to do, but the way it's written has a whole pile of unintended consequences.

    I'd love to see May go down the vote in the Commons route though, would be bloody hilarious to watch the Official Opposition (Government-in-Waiting) vote against an election!
    Mrs May would resign as Prime Minister, but remain as leader of the Conservative Party. The Queen would ask Mrs May (as leader of the largest party in the Commons) if she had the confidence of the House of Commons, and she would say she did not. The Queen would then ask Mr Corbyn, who would likely say that he did not. (Although it would be entertaining if he said he did, and then failed to get his Queen's speech passed.)
    But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?

    The FTPA was written to scupper the Conservatives walking away from the 2010-15 coalition, and that job it did very well. It can't deal with the current situation, where an incoming PM has a massive bounce in the polls, a small Commons majority and some serious business to do - from which an increased public mandate would go down very well.

    I say she should try and get 2/3 of the Commons to vote for an election, but if she doesn't get it then carry on watching the party opposite implode, hopefully with a few more by-election wins or defections along the way.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Another new thread?

    Yes, because UKIP is clearly the big story today.
  • Options
    A potential danger for Labour is that they crash in the next elections, unions withdraw support from Corbyn and he's replaced.

    By another total dud from the left.

    Corbyn is a problem, but not the only one Labour face. They've lost MPs at every election since 2001, I think. They're torn between metropolitan liberals and the working class.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2017
    Sandpit said:

    But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?

    Wrong. She offers her resignation, but she remains as PM until someone who does have the confidence of the House can be found. If there is no such person, she remains as PM and an election is held.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    edited February 2017

    isam said:

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though

    I think the overwhelming likelihood is that UKIP will become a fringe party rather like the BNP used to be in electoral terms, i.e. persist as a receptacle for 'Sod 'em all' votes, getting a small but not derisory percentage in a number of seats, epecially in run-down areas. (I'm not, of course, saying they'll be like the BNP in terms of unpleasantness).
    Yes I agree, and I would suspect a lot of people who voted BNP previously (not that I know any!) weren't particularly motivated by their racially discriminatory policies, but by a feeling of being ignored by the centrist internationalists in charge. Farage did a great job of giving people like that a place to go that wasn't facist. Trevor Phillips programme last night was v good in showing that they weren't "ist" but just unable to keep up with the pace of change,
  • Options

    isam said:

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though

    I think the overwhelming likelihood is that UKIP will become a fringe party rather like the BNP used to be in electoral terms, i.e. persist as a receptacle for 'Sod 'em all' votes, getting a small but not derisory percentage in a number of seats, epecially in run-down areas. (I'm not, of course, saying they'll be like the BNP in terms of unpleasantness).
    More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    Agree. Same message.
  • Options
    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    UKIP a bit like Leicester City ?

    Nowhere to go after EU exit or winning the Prem.
    Shrewd old Nigel knew the time to get out.. at the top!

    I do recall saying once or twice that if he went, UKIP would go to pot, a la a long serving manager at a football club... The haters said they'd flourish without him!
    Based on Leicester's 2014-15 results from the start of the short campaign period of the 2015 general election (W7, D1, L1), shrewd old Nigel Pearson did indeed get out at the top (even though he was pushed).

    And I wonder if Leicester/UKIP are considering a return for their respective former managers?
  • Options

    isam said:

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though

    I think the overwhelming likelihood is that UKIP will become a fringe party rather like the BNP used to be in electoral terms, i.e. persist as a receptacle for 'Sod 'em all' votes, getting a small but not derisory percentage in a number of seats, epecially in run-down areas. (I'm not, of course, saying they'll be like the BNP in terms of unpleasantness).
    More likely they'll revive after the Prime Minister BETRAYS BRITAIN by compromising with foreigners in the negotiations.
    I doubt it, TBH. It's too fragmented a message.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    edited February 2017
    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    UKIP a bit like Leicester City ?

    Nowhere to go after EU exit or winning the Prem.
    Shrewd old Nigel knew the time to get out.. at the top!

    I do recall saying once or twice that if he went, UKIP would go to pot, a la a long serving manager at a football club... The haters said they'd flourish without him!
    He's the most successful politician of our era.

    They should have taken the hint.

    Edit: one of.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    edited February 2017
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    Agree. Same message.
    Well its not is it?

    I have plenty of experience of meeting UKIP people at events and I never heard any racism at all. I doubt people who went to BNP meetings could say the same. It's people like you trying to conflate peoples feelings of isolation and despair with race hate that cause the problems in society
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited February 2017

    Sandpit said:

    But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?

    Wrong. She remains as PM until someone who does have the confidence of the House can be found. If there is no such person, she remains as PM and an election is held.
    But does that still hold under the FTPA? There is a period of two weeks during which a new PM can be found and a motion of confidence passed. Can the Tories all really just do nothing for a fortnight without Corbyn getting a look in, yet leaving Mrs May as PM?

    One thing for sure is that HM won't want to get herself involved in the mess, if at all possible.
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:



    Mrs May would resign as Prime Minister, but remain as leader of the Conservative Party. The Queen would ask Mrs May (as leader of the largest party in the Commons) if she had the confidence of the House of Commons, and she would say she did not. The Queen would then ask Mr Corbyn, who would likely say that he did not. (Although it would be entertaining if he said he did, and then failed to get his Queen's speech passed.)

    But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?

    The FTPA was written to scupper the Conservatives walking away from the 2010-15 coalition, and that job it did very well. It can't deal with the current situation, where an incoming PM has a massive bounce in the polls, a small Commons majority and some serious business to do - from which an increased public mandate would go down very well.

    I say she should try and get 2/3 of the Commons to vote for an election, but if she doesn't get it then carry on watching the party opposite implode, hopefully with a few more by-election wins or defections along the way.
    The PM can't *tell* HM who to call; it's at the monarch's discretion. The outgoing PM can offer advice but this isn't the formal 'advice' she's obliged to follow; more like soundings to an informed observer.

    However, who the queen would call in such circumstances would be interesting. She'd be placed in a difficult position. On the one hand, precedent on a lost confidence motion suggests she should call the LotO; on the other, the Tories still have a majority and precedent there is that she should in the first instance see whether an alternative Tory could command a majority (which they couldn't). If Corbyn accepted the commission, he'd become PM at least for a short time. Would he too be obliged to resign / be dismissed if (when) he failed to achieve a vote of confidence or would he be allowed to continue as PM through the election campaign? If not, a return of May would be the only option - but that too would be controversial given her refusal to serve under any other circumstance.

    If May did want an early dissolution, going for a Commons motion would be the best bet, particularly if she can hang it off the back of the Lords doing something controversial over A50.
  • Options
    AlsoIndigoAlsoIndigo Posts: 1,852
    edited February 2017

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    All the time a serious longterm party of government looks like it is offering the same policies as UKIP on BrExit, UKIP is dead in the water, they just need to stay on life support until the inevitable dirty little compromises and backsliding start, and then start pointing and shouting. Its started already:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/22/uk-not-about-to-shut-the-door-on-low-skilled-eu-migrants-says-david-davis

    That might well mean lots of visas, but then again it might well not, when it firms up a bit the Kippers will start opening purple water from the Tories and their electoral fortunes will revive to some extent.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited February 2017

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:



    Mrs May would resign as Prime Minister, but remain as leader of the Conservative Party. The Queen would ask Mrs May (as leader of the largest party in the Commons) if she had the confidence of the House of Commons, and she would say she did not. The Queen would then ask Mr Corbyn, who would likely say that he did not. (Although it would be entertaining if he said he did, and then failed to get his Queen's speech passed.)

    But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?

    The FTPA was written to scupper the Conservatives walking away from the 2010-15 coalition, and that job it did very well. It can't deal with the current situation, where an incoming PM has a massive bounce in the polls, a small Commons majority and some serious business to do - from which an increased public mandate would go down very well.

    I say she should try and get 2/3 of the Commons to vote for an election, but if she doesn't get it then carry on watching the party opposite implode, hopefully with a few more by-election wins or defections along the way.
    The PM can't *tell* HM who to call; it's at the monarch's discretion. The outgoing PM can offer advice but this isn't the formal 'advice' she's obliged to follow; more like soundings to an informed observer.

    However, who the queen would call in such circumstances would be interesting. She'd be placed in a difficult position. On the one hand, precedent on a lost confidence motion suggests she should call the LotO; on the other, the Tories still have a majority and precedent there is that she should in the first instance see whether an alternative Tory could command a majority (which they couldn't). If Corbyn accepted the commission, he'd become PM at least for a short time. Would he too be obliged to resign / be dismissed if (when) he failed to achieve a vote of confidence or would he be allowed to continue as PM through the election campaign? If not, a return of May would be the only option - but that too would be controversial given her refusal to serve under any other circumstance.

    If May did want an early dissolution, going for a Commons motion would be the best bet, particularly if she can hang it off the back of the Lords doing something controversial over A50.
    You say exactly what I meant, but you put it much more eloquently than I could! I can't see a vote of confidence being called by the Tories if there were any chance of Corbyn becoming PM, even if it were only for a few weeks during the campaign.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,958
    edited February 2017

    Sandpit said:

    rcs1000 said:



    Mrs May would resign as Prime Minister, but remain as leader of the Conservative Party. The Queen would ask Mrs May (as leader of the largest party in the Commons) if she had the confidence of the House of Commons, and she would say she did not. The Queen would then ask Mr Corbyn, who would likely say that he did not. (Although it would be entertaining if he said he did, and then failed to get his Queen's speech passed.)

    But after Mrs May tells HM that the Commons has no confidence in her, she will have to resign as PM, HM will ask her who to call next. Who does she tell the Queen to call?

    The FTPA was written to scupper the Conservatives walking away from the 2010-15 coalition, and that job it did very well. It can't deal with the current situation, where an incoming PM has a massive bounce in the polls, a small Commons majority and some serious business to do - from which an increased public mandate would go down very well.

    I say she should try and get 2/3 of the Commons to vote for an election, but if she doesn't get it then carry on watching the party opposite implode, hopefully with a few more by-election wins or defections along the way.
    The PM can't *tell* HM who to call; it's at the monarch's discretion. The outgoing PM can offer advice but this isn't the formal 'advice' she's obliged to follow; more like soundings to an informed observer.

    However, who the queen would call in such circumstances would be interesting. She'd be placed in a difficult position. On the one hand, precedent on a lost confidence motion suggests she should call the LotO; on the other, the Tories still have a majority and precedent there is that she should in the first instance see whether an alternative Tory could command a majority (which they couldn't). If Corbyn accepted the commission, he'd become PM at least for a short time. Would he too be obliged to resign / be dismissed if (when) he failed to achieve a vote of confidence or would he be allowed to continue as PM through the election campaign? If not, a return of May would be the only option - but that too would be controversial given her refusal to serve under any other circumstance.

    If May did want an early dissolution, going for a Commons motion would be the best bet, particularly if she can hang it off the back of the Lords doing something controversial over A50.
    Who would actually make the 'real' call in the circumstances as to who to err call. I know formally it is the Queen, but which palace official or civil servant makes the real decision ?
  • Options
    ‪This is a bit like 'What have the Romans ever done for us?'‬

    https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/835099127889473537
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    FPT, for @AndyJS

    It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.

    The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.

    It's not 2/3+1; it's 2/3rds. 2/3+1 would be 435, as 2/3rds of 650 is 433.3 and the '+1' raises that to 433.3: to achieve that requires 435.

    I dislike this 'n%+1' terminology as it's nearly always wrong. The correct formulation is 'more than 50%'.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    FPT

    That's quite interesting. It does suggest that trade union support for Corbyn is not absolute, but dependent upon him showing that he can somehow turn this dire situation around (not that he will). But if that is typical it also shows that his support base is, for the moment, still intact.

    Take that, together with the frankly delusional reaction to the results were seeing from the nailed on Corbynites, and everything still suggests that Corbyn still needs to be given a bit more rope - Autumn 2018, with the potential for a new leader to have much the same effect as the successor to Thatcher had on the Tory vote from 1990 to 1992. Nick Palmer is the sort of person that might be used as a barometer - i.e. a Labour member capable of changing their mind who needs to see the light before a challenge stands more than a remote chance. He hasn't, yet, from what I can glean.

    Yep - 2018 has always looked the likely time to me. That said, the Copeland result confirms the opinion poll ratings. If the same thing happens at the May council elections, it could just be that things get brought forward. And, of course, if there is a miracle and McCluskey loses the Unite leadership, then it is game over.

    I think Nick will be a Corbyn supporter until the day after Corbyn is no longer leader; at which point he will say that he was always the wrong man for the job :-)
    Labour need a miracle. Fact is today there are two equally matched Labour parties at each others throats and irreconcilable.

    I would say a split is virtually inevitable. The question is what split.
  • Options
    @MrHarryCole: Ken Livingstone: "A Jeremy Corbyn government is not going to be like the load of old rubbish we had from Blair."‬
  • Options
    I like Shadsy's idea.


    @LadPolitics‏: How about we scrap general elections and just have a rolling schedule of 3 "by-elections" every Thursday?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389
    edited February 2017
    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    Agree. Same message.
    Well its not is it?

    I have plenty of experience of meeting UKIP people at events and I never heard any racism at all. I doubt people who went to BNP meetings could say the same. It's people like you trying to conflate peoples feelings of isolation and despair with race hate that cause the problems in society
    They are both anti-immigrant. The rest is details.

    I doubt your experience met with any reasoned sovereignty argument.

    I could be wrong about your experiences of course.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,927
    edited February 2017

    Sandpit said:

    FPT, for @AndyJS

    It's not possible to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act by a simple vote in the Commons. It would require primary legislation through both Houses of the (Sovereign) Parliament. The problem would be in the Lords, it's quite possible the Parliament Act would be needed to get it through.

    The alternative provision is for 2/3 +1 of the total elected Commons to vote for a motion that Parliament be dissolved and an election held. This requires 434 votes in favour.

    It's not 2/3+1; it's 2/3rds. 2/3+1 would be 435, as 2/3rds of 650 is 433.3 and the '+1' raises that to 433.3: to achieve that requires 435.

    I dislike this 'n%+1' terminology as it's nearly always wrong. The correct formulation is 'more than 50%'.
    More than 2/3, I'm with you. Will get another coffee, or maybe it's beer o'clock?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,960
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Pulpstar said:

    We might be being a bit harsh on UKIP.

    FPTP screws parties that aren't Labour or Tories.

    The SDP back in 1983, with much more electoral nous and incumbents got absolutely shafted by FPTP.

    Not really. If UKIP had lost by say within 5% then I think perhaps Stoke North would be in play for them at the next GE (Maybe a couple of others). They didn't do that - 13% behind was a horrible result.
    I said might.

    But if you can't beat Gareth Snell in the capital of Brexit, then just exactly where do UKIP win?
    I guess a Leave seat where they were a clear second to Labour at the last GE with the Tories nowhere... if one exists!
    Dagenham?
    UKIP too far behind there. Hartlepool might be the one seat UKIP could win vs Labour. But not with Nuttall.

    If Farage ran for the seat he might just make it there.
    ...and not too far in front of the Conservatives in Dag and Rainham either actually

    Maybe the time has come to call it a day, or at least scale down. The BNP will probably make a comeback though


    UKIP a bit like Leicester City ?

    Nowhere to go after EU exit or winning the Prem.
    Shrewd old Nigel knew the time to get out.. at the top!

    I do recall saying once or twice that if he went, UKIP would go to pot, a la a long serving manager at a football club... The haters said they'd flourish without him!
    He's the most successful politician of our era.

    They should have taken the hint.

    Edit: one of.
    Yes they should have, you are right. Last nights results make him look even better
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,389

    @MrHarryCole: Ken Livingstone: "A Jeremy Corbyn government is not going to be like the load of old rubbish we had from Blair."‬

    ie an actual government.
This discussion has been closed.