Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How the overall majority odds moved on a dramatic night of pol

1456810

Comments

  • Just been looking at the numbers and Lab are actually in reach of an overall majority now thanks to the SNP drop. 63 target gains in numerical majority (rather than %) would be as follows:

    Southampton, Itchen 31
    Glasgow South West 60
    Glasgow East 75
    Arfon 92
    Airdrie & Shotts 202
    Preseli Pembrokeshire 314
    Motherwell & Wishaw 318
    Pudsey 331
    Thurrock 345
    Hastings & Rye 346
    Chipping Barnet 353
    Lanark & Hamilton East 360
    Inverclyde 384
    Norwich North 507
    Calder Valley 609
    Aberconwy 635
    Stoke-on-Trent South 663
    Telford 720
    Northampton North 807
    Dunfermline & West Fife 844
    Broxtowe 863
    Bolton West 936
    Na h-Eileanan an Iar 1,007
    Middlesbrough South & East Cleveland 1,020
    Mansfield 1,057
    Glasgow North 1,060
    Hendon 1,076
    Northampton South 1,159
    Pendle 1,279
    Morecambe & Lunesdale 1,399
    Putney 1,554
    Camborne & Redruth 1,577
    Edinburgh North & Leith 1,625
    Finchley & Golders Green 1,657
    Copeland 1,695
    Milton Keynes South 1,725
    Harrow East 1,757
    Milton Keynes North 1,915
    Blackpool North & Cleveleys 2,023
    Glasgow South 2,027
    Watford 2,092
    Morley & Outwood 2,104
    Vale of Glamorgan 2,190
    Glasgow Central 2,267
    West Dunbartonshire 2,288
    Chingford & Woodford Green 2,438
    Crawley 2,457
    South Swindon 2,464
    Worcester 2,490
    Paisley & Renfrewshire South 2,536
    Glasgow North West 2,561
    Carlisle 2,599
    Walsall North 2,601
    Paisley & Renfrewshire North 2,613
    Corby 2,690
    North East Derbyshire 2,861
    Reading West 2,876
    Southport 2,914
    Linlithgow & East Falkirk 2,919
    Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire 3,110
    Cities of London & Westminster 3,148
    Rossendale & Darwen 3,216
    Glenrothes 3,267
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144
    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes was to have such a long campaign. If you're having a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you. Theresa May's decision to have a very long campaign seems like idiocy now.

    I think it could have only been a week shorter.
    A week could have made all the difference in terms of those extra 8 seats.
    Maybe!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,727

    The SCon/Con relationship now seems to me to feel a bit like the CDU/CSU in Germany.

    Ironically having an independent centre-right party would also be a milestone towards operating as an independent country.
    Scottish independence is busted flush.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307

    Oh

    Sinn Fein says Tory/DUP alliance is in contravention of terms of Good Friday Agreement.

    Don't many people among YOUR co-religionists believe in homophobia and extremism?
    You're obsessed.

    Every time you mention this, I'll mention your tacit support for the vile caste system.
    Where did I support the Caste system? I am an atheist FFS!

    Do you deny many Muslims are homophobes and support terrorism?
    In the same way you're a Hindu, I'm a Muslim.

    Would you like me to list the homophobic laws India has?
    I don't believe in reincarnation or astrology, or hundreds of different deities!

    But why do you pick on the DUP? Asian Indo-Pakistani culture is just as or even more homophobic!
    The Tory party are about to undo a lot of Cameron's detoxification work, particularly with gay marriage, by associating themselves with a party whose views are not in line with the mainstream on the mainland. They are not planning on tainting themselves by seeking confidence and supply from a South Asian party, so the comparison really isn't relevant.
    "Many Labour voters share the DUP's homophobia" - discuss.
    The incidence Homophobia is not related to political affiliation.

    But then disagreeing with something isn't the same as say inciting violence against the something you disagree with.
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    Dougie said:



    As it is, no other parties than the Tories can form a government, but they have no majority and are vulnerable to being overthrown by a couple of adverse by-elections. Theresa May's authority has also been shot to pieces, but at a time when the country can't really afford two months of leadership campaigning, meaning she remains in place at the head of a zombie government which slowly leaks authority and credibility.

    What a total clusterfuck. Emigration to Canada or Australia increasingly looks like a good idea.

    Politics in Australia is just as shambolic. Changed PM so many times in recent years their paramedics no longer ask people with suspected concussion who the PM is!
  • glwglw Posts: 10,006
    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes by the Tories was to have such a long campaign. If you've decided on a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you.

    Ah but if you call a snap election with no preparation (as seems to have been the case) you can't really have a short campaign.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,021
    Another thing this election has taught us:

    Do The Sodding Debates!!

    Seriously. I honestly mean this, I don't think May would have done that badly in them. Might have come across quite well as a dull and dutiful rock amidst the waves of squabbling lefties. Might have been some downsides, but you know what was the biggest downside? Not showing up and giving your opponents the "she's running scared" narrative.

    I'm not a fan of debates. Certainly, the 7-party ones leave an awful lot to be desired in terms of format and content. But they are here to stay now. And you cannot influence the narrative in your favour if you fail to show up.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144
    glw said:

    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes by the Tories was to have such a long campaign. If you've decided on a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you.

    Ah but if you call a snap election with no preparation (as seems to have been the case) you can't really have a short campaign.
    I suspect this will be the last snap election we see in a while (not counting the government falling here)
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Scott_P said:
    Before promptly rebranding the Conservatives as the Ruth Unionist Party.

    Murdo Fraser must feel pretty irked that Ruth stood on a no change platform and then promptly nicked his idea even if she did it as stealth.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    EPG said:

    Y0kel said:

    glw said:

    It's surreal. I'm now defending the DUP on social media. I think I will never forgive the Corbyn fans for that. They seem to be trying to suggest they are an unmasked version of the KKK

    Their real crime is keeping the Tories in power.
    Exactly. Whereas SF hypothetically support the Coalition of Chaos would be promoting progressive democratic socialism.
    Progressive Democratic Socialism...that sounds like something North Korea would put out in a communique...

    What queasy conservatives need to get over, the little snowflakes, is no DUP involvement then door open for Corbyn. You think Arlene Foster wants that, you think Conservative voters want that?

    Get f**king real
    Yeah. North Korea. Please. Unionist snowflakes need to get over the fact that Mummy Britain is looking at them, perhaps for the first time, in disdain.
    Oh no, we are used to people looking at us in disdain from across the water.

    And we couldn't give a fuck. We exist, we vote, hello democracy.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited June 2017
    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,253
    Y0kel said:

    glw said:

    It's surreal. I'm now defending the DUP on social media. I think I will never forgive the Corbyn fans for that. They seem to be trying to suggest they are an unmasked version of the KKK

    Their real crime is keeping the Tories in power.
    Exactly. Whereas SF hypothetically support the Coalition of Chaos would be promoting progressive democratic socialism.
    Progressive Democratic Socialism...that sounds like something North Korea would put out in a communique...

    What queasy conservatives need to get over, the little snowflakes, is no DUP involvement then door open for Corbyn. You think Arlene Foster wants that, you think Conservative voters want that?

    Get f**king real
    I couldn't care less about the abuse. That will come anyway because the Tories have had the temerity to deny Corbyn No. 10 Downing Street.

    I'm confident a Con-DUP deal could hold for a couple of years, possibly with a new Con PM. Meanwhile, I'd be working on a credible end to austerity and destroying the economic credentials of the Far Left.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited June 2017
    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    The story of the election appears to be differential turnout - you're right that absolute turnout wasn't up bigly, though.

    A little frustrating for me, as I'd have won a very large amount if it pipped 70%.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,006
    RobD said:

    glw said:

    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes by the Tories was to have such a long campaign. If you've decided on a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you.

    Ah but if you call a snap election with no preparation (as seems to have been the case) you can't really have a short campaign.
    I suspect this will be the last snap election we see in a while (not counting the government falling here)
    Also it is probably a good idea to think a bit more about what you put in a manifesto.
  • TypoTypo Posts: 195

    Another thing this election has taught us:

    Do The Sodding Debates!!

    Seriously. I honestly mean this, I don't think May would have done that badly in them. Might have come across quite well as a dull and dutiful rock amidst the waves of squabbling lefties. Might have been some downsides, but you know what was the biggest downside? Not showing up and giving your opponents the "she's running scared" narrative.

    I'm not a fan of debates. Certainly, the 7-party ones leave an awful lot to be desired in terms of format and content. But they are here to stay now. And you cannot influence the narrative in your favour if you fail to show up.

    The current format of the debates are terrible - she should have offered Corbyn one on one and froze the rest out.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    edited June 2017
    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    Until we can gauge whether some 2015 voters stayed at home and for whom they voted in 2015, that'd be useful data.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Scott_P said:
    The music in the background though :lol:

    Says it all, doesn't it?
    Clicked the link after reading your message. I was expecting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1o3koTLWM
  • Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,237

    Chris_A said:

    Many thanks to all who helped pb.com keep going last night, The only time I had any difficulties getting on was when the exit poll was published and the denial from the pb.com Tories was a an absolute delight to behold.

    I thought you were in the pb.com Tories tribe some years back ;-)
    I've not voted Tory since 1992 mainly because of Major's support for the Union. How could I ever support a party containing enough nutters to elect IDS as leader? Cameron did good things but through it all away by governing in the interests of the Tory party rather the nation.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Another thing this election has taught us:

    Do The Sodding Debates!!

    Seriously. I honestly mean this, I don't think May would have done that badly in them. Might have come across quite well as a dull and dutiful rock amidst the waves of squabbling lefties. Might have been some downsides, but you know what was the biggest downside? Not showing up and giving your opponents the "she's running scared" narrative.

    I'm not a fan of debates. Certainly, the 7-party ones leave an awful lot to be desired in terms of format and content. But they are here to stay now. And you cannot influence the narrative in your favour if you fail to show up.

    I would hope potential successors to TMay will be asked at hustings or by interviewers whether they will participate in GE debates and lose points for any other answer than "yes".
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917
    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes was to have such a long campaign. If you're having a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you. Theresa May's decision to have a very long campaign seems like idiocy now.

    I think it could have only been a week shorter.
    A week could have made all the difference in terms of those extra 8 seats.
    Not a good idea having a vote in half-term week.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,253
    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,672
    Theresa May is being propped up by a party which associated with actual gun-runners, after a campaign where she tried to use that very association against her opponent. Hope the DUP snowflakes aren't going to be surprised that their safe space is being penetrated by appalled British eyes.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    RobD said:

    Chris_A said:

    Many thanks to all who helped pb.com keep going last night, The only time I had any difficulties getting on was when the exit poll was published and the denial from the pb.com Tories was a an absolute delight to behold.

    That can't be right.. PB Tories are never wrong :o
    It was the bloody electorate that got it wrong ..... whoops I've stolen an old Remoaner line that is now superseded by "the electorate has voted for a soft Brexit" or an approximation of that.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,727
    EPG said:

    Y0kel said:

    glw said:

    It's surreal. I'm now defending the DUP on social media. I think I will never forgive the Corbyn fans for that. They seem to be trying to suggest they are an unmasked version of the KKK

    Their real crime is keeping the Tories in power.
    Exactly. Whereas SF hypothetically support the Coalition of Chaos would be promoting progressive democratic socialism.
    Progressive Democratic Socialism...that sounds like something North Korea would put out in a communique...

    What queasy conservatives need to get over, the little snowflakes, is no DUP involvement then door open for Corbyn. You think Arlene Foster wants that, you think Conservative voters want that?

    Get f**king real
    Yeah. North Korea. Please. Unionist snowflakes need to get over the fact that Mummy Britain is looking at them, perhaps for the first time, in disdain.
    You lost. Get over it.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,006

    Not showing up and giving your opponents the "she's running scared" narrative.

    And that is the one message that the most people hear about the debate, as most people don't watch them.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144
    Scott_P said:
    They must pay the big bucks for that kind of insight.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    EPG said:

    Theresa May is being propped up by a party which associated with actual gun-runners, after a campaign where she tried to use that very association against her opponent. Hope the DUP snowflakes aren't going to be surprised that their safe space is being penetrated by appalled British eyes.

    Whats your problem with democractic votes?

    Only when it suits you?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Sean_F said:

    midwinter said:

    Sean_F said:

    There's not much difference between the appeal of May and Cameron, overall. One of them won 306 and 330 seats, the other won 318.

    Osborne though, is about as popular as AIDS.

    She lost seats and Cameron's majority to Jeremy Corbyn ffs . With no Ukip or lib dem challenge worth its salt. A slight difference I'd say.
    I think she was a rotten campaigner.

    But, I think others would have struggled to do better.

    People are sick of austerity. I don't see any easy way around this.
    A couple of ways I can think of.

    * Don't call an unnecessary election in the middle of said austerity with no light at the end of the tunnel.
    * In your manifesto have at least one bright, shiny attractive proposition that enthuses people that you can point to when people point at the austerity and say "yes but it will be worth it because we will deliver this".
    * Bother to turn up to the debates.
    * Look like you care what voters think of you.
    * Look like you're not just taking everyone for granted.
    * Demonstrate that we are all in this together.

    Points 2 and 3 are the main ones. I'm a politics geek and I can't think of anything in the Tory manifesto that was designed to create enthusiasm. The 2015 Tory manifesto had things like a seven day NHS etc - what did the 2017 manifesto have?

    While running a Presidential campaign while running away from the Presidential debates was just pathetic. The days when we didn't have debates were history already. Nobody likes a coward, it was being a coward that cost Brown his respect after the election that never was - May managed to be a coward while actually having an election. That takes some doing.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144

    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??

    Foreign secretary from the Lords? :D
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144
    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    My guess would be youth vote up a lot, older vote depressed.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    RobD said:

    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes was to have such a long campaign. If you're having a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you. Theresa May's decision to have a very long campaign seems like idiocy now.

    I think it could have only been a week shorter.
    A week could have made all the difference in terms of those extra 8 seats.
    Not a good idea having a vote in half-term week.
    She probably should have coincided the GE with the local elections.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651

    Dougie said:



    As it is, no other parties than the Tories can form a government, but they have no majority and are vulnerable to being overthrown by a couple of adverse by-elections. Theresa May's authority has also been shot to pieces, but at a time when the country can't really afford two months of leadership campaigning, meaning she remains in place at the head of a zombie government which slowly leaks authority and credibility.

    What a total clusterfuck. Emigration to Canada or Australia increasingly looks like a good idea.

    Politics in Australia is just as shambolic. Changed PM so many times in recent years their paramedics no longer ask people with suspected concussion who the PM is!
    Wondered if you were exaggerating, and then I found this!

    PARAMEDICS are avoiding gauging patients’ consciousness by asking them who the Prime Minister is, given the rapidly revolving door in the nation’s top job.

    With four prime ministers in fewer than three years — the latest being Malcolm Turnbull — the constantly changing subject was proving so perplexing for even healthy patients that paramedics were avoiding the question or are in some cases providing clues.

    In past decades of political stability the question was a quick means of establishing a person’s level of consciousness.

    Paramedics now have the option of dropping the question while one senior paramedic said if he asked patients who the nation’s leader was he had to offer clues.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Pong said:

    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    The story of the election appears to be differential turnout - you're right that absolute turnout wasn't up bigly, though.

    A little frustrating for me, as I'd have won a very large amount if it pipped 70%.
    Was turnout down anywhere? A list would be interesting.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830

    Scott_P said:
    The music in the background though :lol:

    Says it all, doesn't it?
    Clicked the link after reading your message. I was expecting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1o3koTLWM
    That's the theme tune of the May campaign.

    Meanwhile, Owen Jones....
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UlU2vMSpQE
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,348

    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??

    I could live with that.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    There was also an increase in the number of people on the electrical register of about 400,000 so the rise in tern out was in effect more.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    I don't think it would be hard for the Conservatives to get a new leader who can feel closer to the public and show a bit of sunshine.
  • atia2atia2 Posts: 207
    AndyJS said:


    Since 2010, the British democratic system has really lost the link between what you vote for and what you get. If May goes this week after getting Blair '97 numbers of votes, and there isn't an election within, say, a year or two, then a lot of people haven't got what they voted for. That troubles me.

    I would say we got almost exactly what we voted for. Labour's seats are almost in exact proportion to its vote share, and the Tories punch a little above their vote share. None of the 83% can really complain about that. We voted for a hung Parliament.

  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,838
    @MarqueeMark, I'm sure you'll be happy to join me in welcoming the participation of all those young people who found the time to put their playstations down and go out in the rain to do their civic duty.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    The ww2 in realtime account is currently doing the 1945 election campaign, some wonderful posters

    https://twitter.com/RealTimeWWII/status/873290132962631680
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,439
    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes by the Tories was to have such a long campaign. If you've decided on a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you.

    I think she needed the first two weeks in case the parliamentary vote failed...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144

    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??

    I could live with that.
    Hereditary peerage, of course. Think of it as an apology from the Tory party... :D
  • SaltireSaltire Posts: 525

    Just been looking at the numbers and Lab are actually in reach of an overall majority now thanks to the SNP drop. 63 target gains in numerical majority (rather than %) would be as follows:

    Southampton, Itchen 31
    Glasgow South West 60
    Glasgow East 75
    Arfon 92
    Airdrie & Shotts 202
    Preseli Pembrokeshire 314
    Motherwell & Wishaw 318
    Pudsey 331
    Thurrock 345
    Hastings & Rye 346
    Chipping Barnet 353
    Lanark & Hamilton East 360
    Inverclyde 384
    Norwich North 507
    Calder Valley 609
    Aberconwy 635
    Stoke-on-Trent South 663
    Telford 720
    Northampton North 807
    Dunfermline & West Fife 844
    Broxtowe 863
    Bolton West 936
    Na h-Eileanan an Iar 1,007
    Middlesbrough South & East Cleveland 1,020
    Mansfield 1,057
    Glasgow North 1,060
    Hendon 1,076
    Northampton South 1,159
    Pendle 1,279
    Morecambe & Lunesdale 1,399
    Putney 1,554
    Camborne & Redruth 1,577
    Edinburgh North & Leith 1,625
    Finchley & Golders Green 1,657
    Copeland 1,695
    Milton Keynes South 1,725
    Harrow East 1,757
    Milton Keynes North 1,915
    Blackpool North & Cleveleys 2,023
    Glasgow South 2,027
    Watford 2,092
    Morley & Outwood 2,104
    Vale of Glamorgan 2,190
    Glasgow Central 2,267
    West Dunbartonshire 2,288
    Chingford & Woodford Green 2,438
    Crawley 2,457
    South Swindon 2,464
    Worcester 2,490
    Paisley & Renfrewshire South 2,536
    Glasgow North West 2,561
    Carlisle 2,599
    Walsall North 2,601
    Paisley & Renfrewshire North 2,613
    Corby 2,690
    North East Derbyshire 2,861
    Reading West 2,876
    Southport 2,914
    Linlithgow & East Falkirk 2,919
    Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire 3,110
    Cities of London & Westminster 3,148
    Rossendale & Darwen 3,216
    Glenrothes 3,267

    Interesting list, lot of those seats are in Scotland and Labour majority would see the SNP numbers halved
  • Conversely to get to a healthy majority of 50, the Cons need to gain 32 seats as follows:

    Perth & North Perthshire 21
    Dudley North 22
    Newcastle-under-Lyme 30
    Crewe & Nantwich 48
    Canterbury 187
    Barrow & Furness 209
    Keighley 249
    Lanark & Hamilton East 266
    Ashfield 441
    Bishop Auckland 502
    Peterborough 607
    Stroud 687
    Westmorland & Lonsdale 777
    Bedford 789
    Oxford West & Abingdon 816
    Ipswich 831
    Stockton South 888
    Colne Valley 978
    Edinburgh South West 1,097
    Warwick & Leamington 1,206
    Central Ayrshire 1,267
    Penistone & Stocksbridge 1,322
    Argyll & Bute 1,328
    Carshalton & Wallington 1,369
    Lincoln 1,538
    Portsmouth South 1,554
    Eastbourne 1,609
    Wrexham 1,832
    Derby North 2,015
    Wolverhampton South West 2,175
    Wakefield 2,176
    High Peak 2,322
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,384
    FF43 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    From Twitter

    To be fair Theresa May warned of coalition of chaos propped up by extremist terrorist sympathisers. She just didn't say she'd be leading it.

    The "coalition of chaos" meme is big amongst my non-politically involved acquaintance right now.
    Without the Shinners, the Coalition of Chaos can only muster 315 seats.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,736
    edited June 2017
    Dougie said:

    I suspect a lot of the criticism of May's proposed deal with the DUP is simply a manifestation of post-election hysteria, and doesn't really reflect the perception of the man on the Clapham omnibus (who in fairness is probably a Corbynite given the way London voted).

    However, two points (unrelated to each other):

    1) In the past Labour has not been that willing to criticise the Tories too loudly for potentially working with the DUP because they're not willing to endanger the peace process and because they might also need the DUP's assistance in the future. However, with the DUP absolutely ruling out working with Corbyn, and Corbyn being in favour of Irish unification, I think that restraint might well not be there this time.

    2) I wonder if this result is not the worst possible result for the Tories. If they had won around ten seats less, Corbyn would have come to power on the back of the SNP and odds and sods. And, as David Herdson predicted a couple of weeks ago, a government led by him would probably have been incredibly weak and incompetent, having to deal with the contradictory demands of their voting coalition on Brexit, and in short time incredibly unpopular. With the Tories sitting on a bit over 300 seats and gaining seats at by-elections, they could have eventually succeeded in passing a vote of no confidence, bringing about an election in which they would likely won a good majority.

    Ten-fifteen seats more and the Conservatives would have a majority, wouldn't need to depend on the DUP and would exercise a much greater degree of control over the political scene.

    As it is, no other parties than the Tories can form a government, but they have no majority and are vulnerable to being overthrown by a couple of adverse by-elections. Theresa May's authority has also been shot to pieces, but at a time when the country can't really afford two months of leadership campaigning, meaning she remains in place at the head of a zombie government which slowly leaks authority and credibility.

    What a total clusterfuck. Emigration to Canada or Australia increasingly looks like a good idea.

    Good analysis.

    However if Con had 10 seats less I suspect Corbyn would have come in, governed in a fairly moderate way for 6 months which got people used to the concept of him as PM without doing anything too wild, and then Corbyn would have called another GE which would have given him a majority.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Brexit is dead

    @iankatz1000: .@nadhimzahawi concedes if PM said she did not have sufficient mandate for Brexit talks before election she can't have one now #newsnight
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144
    edited June 2017
    I wonder, could the next election (if it is this year) be fought on leave/remain lines.. with Labour promising to basically annul the referendum result?
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    RobD said:
    I think my view on Ruth is now akin to tse and his Ozzie. Saved us from the trots.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,366
    Sean_F said:

    The SCon/Con relationship now seems to me to feel a bit like the CDU/CSU in Germany.

    Ironically having an independent centre-right party would also be a milestone towards operating as an independent country.
    Scottish independence is busted flush.
    Syntax a wee bit astray?
    How's your re-rat to the Tessy Brexit party going?

  • SaltireSaltire Posts: 525
    edited June 2017
    AndyJS said:

    Pong said:

    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    The story of the election appears to be differential turnout - you're right that absolute turnout wasn't up bigly, though.

    A little frustrating for me, as I'd have won a very large amount if it pipped 70%.
    Was turnout down anywhere? A list would be interesting.
    I think that it was down in across fair bit of Scotland, especially in seats that the SNP still hold.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    I'm of the view that it is right that the Tories are the ones forming the next government - Labour are having a laugh when they say that they can seriously govern with 261 seats. But I am also not exactly ecstatic that it's with the DUP, and I do think that by association they will re-toxify the Conservative brand.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144
    Saltire said:

    Just been looking at the numbers and Lab are actually in reach of an overall majority now thanks to the SNP drop. 63 target gains in numerical majority (rather than %) would be as follows:

    Interesting list, lot of those seats are in Scotland and Labour majority would see the SNP numbers halved
    Halved again? Please let that happen! :D
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,439
    Scott_P said:

    Brexit is dead

    @iankatz1000: .@nadhimzahawi concedes if PM said she did not have sufficient mandate for Brexit talks before election she can't have one now #newsnight

    That's one of the reasons she has to go...
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Newsnight discussing what I was talking about earlier, that UKIP not standing in 50% of seats probably cost the Tories an overall majority.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,727
    EPG said:

    Theresa May is being propped up by a party which associated with actual gun-runners, after a campaign where she tried to use that very association against her opponent. Hope the DUP snowflakes aren't going to be surprised that their safe space is being penetrated by appalled British eyes.

    Tories and Unionists are allies. Live with it.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @iankatz1000: .@nadhimzahawi says Theresa May can govern for five years with minority govt. @johnprescott says she won't last five months #newsnight
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,672
    Sean_F said:

    EPG said:

    Y0kel said:

    glw said:

    It's surreal. I'm now defending the DUP on social media. I think I will never forgive the Corbyn fans for that. They seem to be trying to suggest they are an unmasked version of the KKK

    Their real crime is keeping the Tories in power.
    Exactly. Whereas SF hypothetically support the Coalition of Chaos would be promoting progressive democratic socialism.
    Progressive Democratic Socialism...that sounds like something North Korea would put out in a communique...

    What queasy conservatives need to get over, the little snowflakes, is no DUP involvement then door open for Corbyn. You think Arlene Foster wants that, you think Conservative voters want that?

    Get f**king real
    Yeah. North Korea. Please. Unionist snowflakes need to get over the fact that Mummy Britain is looking at them, perhaps for the first time, in disdain.
    You lost. Get over it.
    Your woman threw away your majority. Suck it up, guys.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,021

    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??

    People overestimate Gove on here. He's undoubtedly a clever man, but I do not think he is prime ministerial.

    Rudd, I could get behind. But I fear her now minuscule majority will put paid to that at the moment.

    I want Ruth to come to Westminster :(
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492

    Sean_F said:

    midwinter said:

    Sean_F said:

    There's not much difference between the appeal of May and Cameron, overall. One of them won 306 and 330 seats, the other won 318.

    Osborne though, is about as popular as AIDS.

    She lost seats and Cameron's majority to Jeremy Corbyn ffs . With no Ukip or lib dem challenge worth its salt. A slight difference I'd say.
    I think she was a rotten campaigner.

    But, I think others would have struggled to do better.

    People are sick of austerity. I don't see any easy way around this.
    A couple of ways I can think of.

    * Don't call an unnecessary election in the middle of said austerity with no light at the end of the tunnel.
    * In your manifesto have at least one bright, shiny attractive proposition that enthuses people that you can point to when people point at the austerity and say "yes but it will be worth it because we will deliver this".
    * Bother to turn up to the debates.
    * Look like you care what voters think of you.
    * Look like you're not just taking everyone for granted.
    * Demonstrate that we are all in this together.

    Points 2 and 3 are the main ones. I'm a politics geek and I can't think of anything in the Tory manifesto that was designed to create enthusiasm. The 2015 Tory manifesto had things like a seven day NHS etc - what did the 2017 manifesto have?

    While running a Presidential campaign while running away from the Presidential debates was just pathetic. The days when we didn't have debates were history already. Nobody likes a coward, it was being a coward that cost Brown his respect after the election that never was - May managed to be a coward while actually having an election. That takes some doing.
    I would agree with all of that.

    The bright shiny thing could have been an extra 350 mill for the NHS every week!

    I would also add don't include in you manifesto things that the party has spend so much time criticizing at the last election i.e. price caps on energy. by implication you endorse the other party's economic judgment! and demoralize your won supporters.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,144

    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??

    People overestimate Gove on here. He's undoubtedly a clever man, but I do not think he is prime ministerial.

    Rudd, I could get behind. But I fear her now minuscule majority will put paid to that at the moment.

    I want Ruth to come to Westminster :(
    I don't buy the argument that a small majority means she can't be a PM. If she was PM and lost her seat but the Tories gained overall, she surely would find a new seat relatively quickly? Somewhat embarrassing, but not the end of the world.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    Another thing this election has taught us:

    Do The Sodding Debates!!

    Seriously. I honestly mean this, I don't think May would have done that badly in them. Might have come across quite well as a dull and dutiful rock amidst the waves of squabbling lefties. Might have been some downsides, but you know what was the biggest downside? Not showing up and giving your opponents the "she's running scared" narrative.

    I'm not a fan of debates. Certainly, the 7-party ones leave an awful lot to be desired in terms of format and content. But they are here to stay now. And you cannot influence the narrative in your favour if you fail to show up.

    I think she could have got away with just debating Jezza.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes by the Tories was to have such a long campaign. If you've decided on a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you.

    It was having nothing to say for most of the campaign that did the damage since other narratives arose to fill the gap. It was like the Tories had never taken part in a general election campaign before.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,348

    RobD said:
    I think my view on Ruth is now akin to tse and his Ozzie. Saved us from the trots.
    But we agree Mark Reckless is a c*** who deserves a red hot poker up his arse.
  • AR404AR404 Posts: 21
    Saltire said:

    AndyJS said:

    Pong said:

    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    The story of the election appears to be differential turnout - you're right that absolute turnout wasn't up bigly, though.

    A little frustrating for me, as I'd have won a very large amount if it pipped 70%.
    Was turnout down anywhere? A list would be interesting.
    I think that it was down in across fair bit of Scotland, especially in seats that the SNP still hold.
    Looking at the BBC map it seems have also fallen back in northern leave constituencies
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    AndyJS said:

    Maybe one of the biggest mistakes by the Tories was to have such a long campaign. If you've decided on a snap election because the polls look good, surely the smart thing to do would be to have as short a campaign as possible so that time is limited if the polls do start to move against you.

    Conversely, none of the issues about Jeremy Corbyn have gone away.

    He's not the messiah. And a long period in opposition with him fully under the spotlight - having become so popular during the campaign - might not necessarily be to his benefit.

    If I were the Tories, I'd be undermining his economics and credibility for the next few years relentlessly, whilst positively engagingly with young voters-middle aged with an offer of their own based on economic reality.
    This could be the best thing that could have happened - if the Corbyn surge had not happened now and been defeated by a whisker, he could have made his move in 2020 and won. As it is we now know what we are faced with. He is a brilliant campaigner but he's still as mad as a box of frogs and his policies are worse, and can be attacked. He can't do too many stadium rallies outside of election campaigns, he is 68 and while he can ensure that his successor shares his politics, it's less easy to hand on the charisma.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Saltire said:

    AndyJS said:

    Pong said:

    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    The story of the election appears to be differential turnout - you're right that absolute turnout wasn't up bigly, though.

    A little frustrating for me, as I'd have won a very large amount if it pipped 70%.
    Was turnout down anywhere? A list would be interesting.
    I think that it was down in across fair bit of Scotland, especially in seats that the SNP still hold.
    Yes, turnout was down in Scotland bringing it in line with the UK as a whole I think
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,253
    Y0kel said:

    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    Until we can gauge whether some 2015 voters stayed at home and for whom they voted in 2015, that'd be useful data.
    I suspect the true hard work of understanding what really happened in this election has only just begun.

    I certainly want to take a second look at the YouGov model.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,727

    Sean_F said:

    midwinter said:

    Sean_F said:

    There's not much difference between the appeal of May and Cameron, overall. One of them won 306 and 330 seats, the other won 318.

    Osborne though, is about as popular as AIDS.

    She lost seats and Cameron's majority to Jeremy Corbyn ffs . With no Ukip or lib dem challenge worth its salt. A slight difference I'd say.
    I think she was a rotten campaigner.

    But, I think others would have struggled to do better.

    People are sick of austerity. I don't see any easy way around this.
    A couple of ways I can think of.

    * Don't call an unnecessary election in the middle of said austerity with no light at the end of the tunnel.
    * In your manifesto have at least one bright, shiny attractive proposition that enthuses people that you can point to when people point at the austerity and say "yes but it will be worth it because we will deliver this".
    * Bother to turn up to the debates.
    * Look like you care what voters think of you.
    * Look like you're not just taking everyone for granted.
    * Demonstrate that we are all in this together.

    Points 2 and 3 are the main ones. I'm a politics geek and I can't think of anything in the Tory manifesto that was designed to create enthusiasm. The 2015 Tory manifesto had things like a seven day NHS etc - what did the 2017 manifesto have?

    While running a Presidential campaign while running away from the Presidential debates was just pathetic. The days when we didn't have debates were history already. Nobody likes a coward, it was being a coward that cost Brown his respect after the election that never was - May managed to be a coward while actually having an election. That takes some doing.
    It's hard to disagree.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    Scott_P said:

    Brexit is dead

    @iankatz1000: .@nadhimzahawi concedes if PM said she did not have sufficient mandate for Brexit talks before election she can't have one now #newsnight

    No it is not, this vote was not a rejection of Brexit outside of Remain areas, it was a vote for an easing of austerity and against paying more for social care.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    AndyJS said:

    Newsnight discussing what I was talking about earlier, that UKIP not standing in 50% of seats probably cost the Tories an overall majority.

    I'm not watching News night as I don't have a TV, but do they have a proper statistical analysis to back this up? as in has somebody looked at where UKIP did not stand and was there a bigger swing to Labor there, or are they just going of hunches?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    The man on the Clapham omnibus doesn't know anything about the DUP. They are about to find out.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,698
    AndyJS said:

    Pong said:

    AndyJS said:

    Turnout was only up by 2.6%. Is that consistent with the surge in youth turnout we keep being told about?

    The story of the election appears to be differential turnout - you're right that absolute turnout wasn't up bigly, though.

    A little frustrating for me, as I'd have won a very large amount if it pipped 70%.
    Was turnout down anywhere? A list would be interesting.
    Turnout was down in Scotland compared to 2015.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    JonathanD said:

    It was like the Tories had never taken part in a general election campaign before.

    May sacked the ace campaign team
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069

    RobD said:
    I think my view on Ruth is now akin to tse and his Ozzie. Saved us from the trots.
    But we agree Mark Reckless is a c*** who deserves a red hot poker up his arse.
    For eternity.

    Spursy is going to feature on Sunday isn't it
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    edited June 2017

    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??

    No, it will be Boris no contest. Woman on BBC London News says she did not vote for May but would have voted for Boris. Boris could get a majority of 50 I think against Corbyn. Could even be Davis leads during negotiations then Boris takes over post Brexit before election

  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Another thing this election has taught us:

    Do The Sodding Debates!!

    Seriously. I honestly mean this, I don't think May would have done that badly in them. Might have come across quite well as a dull and dutiful rock amidst the waves of squabbling lefties. Might have been some downsides, but you know what was the biggest downside? Not showing up and giving your opponents the "she's running scared" narrative.

    I'm not a fan of debates. Certainly, the 7-party ones leave an awful lot to be desired in terms of format and content. But they are here to stay now. And you cannot influence the narrative in your favour if you fail to show up.

    I think she could have got away with just debating Jezza.
    Yes, nothing else will do. The point about the loopier formats are that they were invented ad hoc to cope with Dave's debate shyness.

    Mind you, even her wins at PMQs were pretty toe-curling. If she had done a one on one with a fired up Jezza she might well have been monstered.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,062
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Brexit is dead

    @iankatz1000: .@nadhimzahawi concedes if PM said she did not have sufficient mandate for Brexit talks before election she can't have one now #newsnight

    No it is not, this vote was not a rejection of Brexit outside of Remain areas, it was a vote for an easing of austerity and against paying more for social care.
    How do you know?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,253

    Sean_F said:

    midwinter said:

    Sean_F said:

    There's not much difference between the appeal of May and Cameron, overall. One of them won 306 and 330 seats, the other won 318.

    Osborne though, is about as popular as AIDS.

    She lost seats and Cameron's majority to Jeremy Corbyn ffs . With no Ukip or lib dem challenge worth its salt. A slight difference I'd say.
    I think she was a rotten campaigner.

    But, I think others would have struggled to do better.

    People are sick of austerity. I don't see any easy way around this.
    A couple of ways I can think of.

    * Don't call an unnecessary election in the middle of said austerity with no light at the end of the tunnel.
    * In your manifesto have at least one bright, shiny attractive proposition that enthuses people that you can point to when people point at the austerity and say "yes but it will be worth it because we will deliver this".
    * Bother to turn up to the debates.
    * Look like you care what voters think of you.
    * Look like you're not just taking everyone for granted.
    * Demonstrate that we are all in this together.

    Points 2 and 3 are the main ones. I'm a politics geek and I can't think of anything in the Tory manifesto that was designed to create enthusiasm. The 2015 Tory manifesto had things like a seven day NHS etc - what did the 2017 manifesto have?

    While running a Presidential campaign while running away from the Presidential debates was just pathetic. The days when we didn't have debates were history already. Nobody likes a coward, it was being a coward that cost Brown his respect after the election that never was - May managed to be a coward while actually having an election. That takes some doing.
    I found the manifesto extremely hard work.

    There were a few nuggets in there, but they were buried within it and couched in vague language.

    Even the presentation didn't help. Long reams of text, huge paragraphs, and very few pictures/diagrams or tables to break it up.

    The GE2015 manifesto was far better.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,021
    edited June 2017
    RobD said:

    One for TSE: Amber Rudd-Michael Gove dream ticket. Michael Gove enobles Osborne.

    Osborne comes back as the new Lord Mandelson??

    People overestimate Gove on here. He's undoubtedly a clever man, but I do not think he is prime ministerial.

    Rudd, I could get behind. But I fear her now minuscule majority will put paid to that at the moment.

    I want Ruth to come to Westminster :(
    I don't buy the argument that a small majority means she can't be a PM. If she was PM and lost her seat but the Tories gained overall, she surely would find a new seat relatively quickly? Somewhat embarrassing, but not the end of the world.
    Actually I think it would be worse than embarrasing. As silly as it is that we allow voters in one tiny corner of the realm to hold the power over electing our prime minister, the narrative and mood music that would come out of "our leader lost their seat" would make their position even shakier than Mays right now. It's not right, but it wouldn't play well.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,348

    RobD said:
    I think my view on Ruth is now akin to tse and his Ozzie. Saved us from the trots.
    But we agree Mark Reckless is a c*** who deserves a red hot poker up his arse.
    For eternity.

    Spursy is going to feature on Sunday isn't it
    Nope.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    RobD said:

    I wonder, could the next election (if it is this year) be fought on leave/remain lines.. with Labour promising to basically annul the referendum result?

    I was thinking about this earlier. Labour got about 25% of Leave voters, vs just over 50% of Remain voters, according (I think) to YouGov - apologies if I have misremembered the exact figures, I'm knackered.

    It's not plausible that that proportion of Leave voters were all voting Labour as Regrexiters, if the opinion polls about Regret are correct. A lot of Kippers went back to their natural home. These voters are not just a significant chunk of Labour's voter coalition (you don't want to abandon, say, half of them if you are fighting for a majority) but in lots of northern and Midlands constituencies I suspect they were the final line of defence that saw Labour home, in seats where the Tories had done the Conservative + UKIP > Labour arithmetic and thought they were in with a good chance.

    It also seems unlikely that with such a high share of Remain voters already in the net (presumably this is largely based on demographics, especially age) that going All-Out Remain can reel many more in.

    It would therefore surprise me if, in the event of a new election before Brexit is complete, Labour went down the "Revoke Article 50" line, and a bigger surprise if they took that approach and then won.

    Running on a "second referendum on the final deal" ticket, though, seems to me more plausible.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    HYUFD said:

    this vote was not a rejection of Brexit outside of Remain areas, it was a vote for an easing of austerity and against paying more for social care.

    "Easing of austerity" is not compatible with Brexit.

    Brexit is dead, not because the electorate voted against it per se, but because it cannot be delivered.

    The votes in the HoC for all the dirty work are not there.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,253
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Y0kel said:

    I have never understood the idea amongst some Conservatives that Osborne could be leader.

    Net vote loser.

    The view is that people will flock to the Conservatives if they promise to slash public spending and taxes, promote mass migration, and support the EU.
    I don't understand why so many present-day Conservatives support unrestricted migration, when that certainly wasn't the case from the 1950s to the 1980s.

    One of the reasons Thatcher got elected, and stayed in office, is immigration and she passed a couple of major pieces of legislation in her first term to address it.

    They worked, it went away as an issue, and she got re-elected.
    It differentiates them from the common herd.
    It's like how when Dave put foxhunting in the GE2015 manifesto it wasn't an issue, but when Theresa May did in the GE2017 manifesto, it was.

    The pledges were identical.
  • ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312

    @MarqueeMark, I'm sure you'll be happy to join me in welcoming the participation of all those young people who found the time to put their playstations down and go out in the rain to do their civic duty.

    Who can blame them for voting for Father Christmas when they found out he was real after all
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,384

    Another thing this election has taught us:

    Do The Sodding Debates!!

    Seriously. I honestly mean this, I don't think May would have done that badly in them. Might have come across quite well as a dull and dutiful rock amidst the waves of squabbling lefties. Might have been some downsides, but you know what was the biggest downside? Not showing up and giving your opponents the "she's running scared" narrative.

    I'm not a fan of debates. Certainly, the 7-party ones leave an awful lot to be desired in terms of format and content. But they are here to stay now. And you cannot influence the narrative in your favour if you fail to show up.

    I think she could have got away with just debating Jezza.
    With whom would she have been debating Jezza? :lol:
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069

    RobD said:
    I think my view on Ruth is now akin to tse and his Ozzie. Saved us from the trots.
    But we agree Mark Reckless is a c*** who deserves a red hot poker up his arse.
    For eternity.

    Spursy is going to feature on Sunday isn't it
    Nope.
    Soldado then.. open goal etc.?
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 758
    One of the best things about elections is the day after, when all the people who loudly told us what would happen, and were wrong, tell us why it happened.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,683
    edited June 2017

    Conversely to get to a healthy majority of 50, the Cons need to gain 32 seats as follows:

    Perth & North Perthshire 21
    Dudley North 22
    Newcastle-under-Lyme 30
    Crewe & Nantwich 48
    Canterbury 187
    Barrow & Furness 209
    Keighley 249
    Lanark & Hamilton East 266
    Ashfield 441
    Bishop Auckland 502
    Peterborough 607
    Stroud 687
    Westmorland & Lonsdale 777
    Bedford 789
    Oxford West & Abingdon 816
    Ipswich 831
    Stockton South 888
    Colne Valley 978
    Edinburgh South West 1,097
    Warwick & Leamington 1,206
    Central Ayrshire 1,267
    Penistone & Stocksbridge 1,322
    Argyll & Bute 1,328
    Carshalton & Wallington 1,369
    Lincoln 1,538
    Portsmouth South 1,554
    Eastbourne 1,609
    Wrexham 1,832
    Derby North 2,015
    Wolverhampton South West 2,175
    Wakefield 2,176
    High Peak 2,322

    Apart from Warwick and Leamington, Central Ayrshire, Edinburgh SW, Oxford W and Abingdon, Bedford, Westmoreland and Lonsdale and Stroud, Lanark and Hamilton and Perth and North Perthshire, the remaining 23 are all Leave seats which would help Boris
  • atia2atia2 Posts: 207
    HYUFD said:



    No it is not, this vote was not a rejection of Brexit outside of Remain areas, it was a vote for an easing of austerity and against paying more for social care.

    Correction: it was a vote against increased self-funding of social care. That's not the same as a vote against paying more.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,021

    RobD said:

    I wonder, could the next election (if it is this year) be fought on leave/remain lines.. with Labour promising to basically annul the referendum result?

    I was thinking about this earlier. Labour got about 25% of Leave voters, vs just over 50% of Remain voters, according (I think) to YouGov - apologies if I have misremembered the exact figures, I'm knackered.

    It's not plausible that that proportion of Leave voters were all voting Labour as Regrexiters, if the opinion polls about Regret are correct. A lot of Kippers went back to their natural home. These voters are not just a significant chunk of Labour's voter coalition (you don't want to abandon, say, half of them if you are fighting for a majority) but in lots of northern and Midlands constituencies I suspect they were the final line of defence that saw Labour home, in seats where the Tories had done the Conservative + UKIP > Labour arithmetic and thought they were in with a good chance.

    It also seems unlikely that with such a high share of Remain voters already in the net (presumably this is largely based on demographics, especially age) that going All-Out Remain can reel many more in.

    It would therefore surprise me if, in the event of a new election before Brexit is complete, Labour went down the "Revoke Article 50" line, and a bigger surprise if they took that approach and then won.

    Running on a "second referendum on the final deal" ticket, though, seems to me more plausible.
    I dunno. A second referendum on the deal ticket didn't help the Lib Dems that much. I actually think it could repel some of the core who helped retain a number of those seats that looked like they were going to fall to May's blue labour pitch.
  • KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,917

    Sean_F said:

    midwinter said:

    Sean_F said:

    There's not much difference between the appeal of May and Cameron, overall. One of them won 306 and 330 seats, the other won 318.

    Osborne though, is about as popular as AIDS.

    She lost seats and Cameron's majority to Jeremy Corbyn ffs . With no Ukip or lib dem challenge worth its salt. A slight difference I'd say.
    I think she was a rotten campaigner.

    But, I think others would have struggled to do better.

    People are sick of austerity. I don't see any easy way around this.
    A couple of ways I can think of.

    * Don't call an unnecessary election in the middle of said austerity with no light at the end of the tunnel.
    * In your manifesto have at least one bright, shiny attractive proposition that enthuses people that you can point to when people point at the austerity and say "yes but it will be worth it because we will deliver this".
    * Bother to turn up to the debates.
    * Look like you care what voters think of you.
    * Look like you're not just taking everyone for granted.
    * Demonstrate that we are all in this together.

    Points 2 and 3 are the main ones. I'm a politics geek and I can't think of anything in the Tory manifesto that was designed to create enthusiasm. The 2015 Tory manifesto had things like a seven day NHS etc - what did the 2017 manifesto have?

    While running a Presidential campaign while running away from the Presidential debates was just pathetic. The days when we didn't have debates were history already. Nobody likes a coward, it was being a coward that cost Brown his respect after the election that never was - May managed to be a coward while actually having an election. That takes some doing.
    I found the manifesto extremely hard work.

    There were a few nuggets in there, but they were buried within it and couched in vague language.

    Even the presentation didn't help. Long reams of text, huge paragraphs, and very few pictures/diagrams or tables to break it up.

    The GE2015 manifesto was far better.
    One manifesto was written by George Osborne, one was written by Ben Gummer, the now former MP for Ipswich.

    Lolz.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,348

    RobD said:
    I think my view on Ruth is now akin to tse and his Ozzie. Saved us from the trots.
    But we agree Mark Reckless is a c*** who deserves a red hot poker up his arse.
    For eternity.

    Spursy is going to feature on Sunday isn't it
    Nope.
    Soldado then.. open goal etc.?
    No. I'm comparing it to an (in)famous military campaign.
  • A third interesting thing is that the SNP are vulnerable to further Unionist tactical voting and don't really have any safe seats left. Here are their remaining seats sorted by majority and with the challenger(s):

    Constituency Target
    North East Fife 2 - LD
    Perth & North Perthshire 21 - Con
    Glasgow South West 60 - Lab
    Glasgow East 75 - Lab
    Airdrie & Shotts 202 - Lab
    Lanark & Hamilton East 266 - Con/Lab
    Motherwell & Wishaw 318 - Lab
    Inverclyde 384 - Lab
    Dunfermline & West Fife 844 - Lab
    Na h-Eileanan an Iar 1,007 - Lab
    Glasgow North 1,060 - Lab
    Edinburgh South West 1,097 - Con
    Central Ayrshire 1,267 - Con
    Argyll & Bute 1,328 - Con
    Edinburgh North & Leith 1,625 - Lab/Con
    Glasgow South 2,027 - Lab
    Glasgow Central 2,267 - Lab
    West Dunbartonshire 2,288 - Lab
    Paisley & Renfrewshire South 2,536 - Lab
    Glasgow North West 2,561 - Lab
    Paisley & Renfrewshire North 2,613 - Lab/Con
    Linlithgow & East Falkirk 2,919 - Lab/Con
    Glenrothes 3,267 - Lab
    Edinburgh East 3,425 - Lab
    North Ayrshire & Arran 3,633 - Con/Lab
    East Kilbride, Strathaven & Lesmahagow 3,866 - Lab
    Livingston 3,878 - Lab
    Aberdeen North 4,139 - Lab
    Cumbernauld, Kilsyth & Kirkintilloch East 4,264 - Lab
    Falkirk 4,923 - Lab/Con
    Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey 4,924 - Con
    Dundee West 5,322 - Lab
    Ross, Skye & Lochaber 5,919 - Con/LD
    Kilmarnock & Loudoun 6,269 - Lab/Con
    Dundee East 6,645 - Con/Lab
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651

    Sean_F said:

    midwinter said:

    Sean_F said:

    There's not much difference between the appeal of May and Cameron, overall. One of them won 306 and 330 seats, the other won 318.

    Osborne though, is about as popular as AIDS.

    She lost seats and Cameron's majority to Jeremy Corbyn ffs . With no Ukip or lib dem challenge worth its salt. A slight difference I'd say.
    I think she was a rotten campaigner.

    But, I think others would have struggled to do better.

    People are sick of austerity. I don't see any easy way around this.
    A couple of ways I can think of.

    * Don't call an unnecessary election in the middle of said austerity with no light at the end of the tunnel.
    * In your manifesto have at least one bright, shiny attractive proposition that enthuses people that you can point to when people point at the austerity and say "yes but it will be worth it because we will deliver this".
    * Bother to turn up to the debates.
    * Look like you care what voters think of you.
    * Look like you're not just taking everyone for granted.
    * Demonstrate that we are all in this together.

    Points 2 and 3 are the main ones. I'm a politics geek and I can't think of anything in the Tory manifesto that was designed to create enthusiasm. The 2015 Tory manifesto had things like a seven day NHS etc - what did the 2017 manifesto have?

    While running a Presidential campaign while running away from the Presidential debates was just pathetic. The days when we didn't have debates were history already. Nobody likes a coward, it was being a coward that cost Brown his respect after the election that never was - May managed to be a coward while actually having an election. That takes some doing.
    I found the manifesto extremely hard work.

    There were a few nuggets in there, but they were buried within it and couched in vague language.

    Even the presentation didn't help. Long reams of text, huge paragraphs, and very few pictures/diagrams or tables to break it up.

    The GE2015 manifesto was far better.
    It reminded me of an undergraduate assignment.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    Sean_F said:

    midwinter said:

    Sean_F said:

    There's not much difference between the appeal of May and Cameron, overall. One of them won 306 and 330 seats, the other won 318.

    Osborne though, is about as popular as AIDS.

    She lost seats and Cameron's majority to Jeremy Corbyn ffs . With no Ukip or lib dem challenge worth its salt. A slight difference I'd say.
    I think she was a rotten campaigner.

    But, I think others would have struggled to do better.

    People are sick of austerity. I don't see any easy way around this.
    A couple of ways I can think of.

    * Don't call an unnecessary election in the middle of said austerity with no light at the end of the tunnel.
    * In your manifesto have at least one bright, shiny attractive proposition that enthuses people that you can point to when people point at the austerity and say "yes but it will be worth it because we will deliver this".
    * Bother to turn up to the debates.
    * Look like you care what voters think of you.
    * Look like you're not just taking everyone for granted.
    * Demonstrate that we are all in this together.

    Points 2 and 3 are the main ones. I'm a politics geek and I can't think of anything in the Tory manifesto that was designed to create enthusiasm. The 2015 Tory manifesto had things like a seven day NHS etc - what did the 2017 manifesto have?

    While running a Presidential campaign while running away from the Presidential debates was just pathetic. The days when we didn't have debates were history already. Nobody likes a coward, it was being a coward that cost Brown his respect after the election that never was - May managed to be a coward while actually having an election. That takes some doing.
    I found the manifesto extremely hard work.

    There were a few nuggets in there, but they were buried within it and couched in vague language.

    Even the presentation didn't help. Long reams of text, huge paragraphs, and very few pictures/diagrams or tables to break it up.

    The GE2015 manifesto was far better.
    There was simply no narrative or vision to the campaign - it was all process. 2015 was all Long Term Economic Plan means more money for NHS, schools, etc. It set austerity in its context.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,727
    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Brexit is dead

    @iankatz1000: .@nadhimzahawi concedes if PM said she did not have sufficient mandate for Brexit talks before election she can't have one now #newsnight

    No it is not, this vote was not a rejection of Brexit outside of Remain areas, it was a vote for an easing of austerity and against paying more for social care.
    Parties that were opposed to Brexit won 70 seats, compared to 580.

    MP's can obviously renege, but they'd lose out
This discussion has been closed.