Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » To win the next election LAB need to find converts and it’s ha
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » To win the next election LAB need to find converts and it’s hard to see where these are coming from
With all the current speculation about a new election and the possibility of Corbyn becoming PM the latest polling is being sidelined and the question of where LAB’s required new support is going to come from is hardly mentioned.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Reality https://twitter.com/JamesERothwell/status/1051820853925687297
There's still negative voting however, and that is what is dominating voting intentions it seems.
A No Deal Brexit and all the resultant problems might just see enough switchers/stay at home Tories to put Corbyn into Number 10.
JohnO nailed it yesterday if the government collapses then he'd expect a Labour majority.
Obviously this is generally misguided, since people change their opinions as they age. But if you don't let them grow up in the same way as their parents did, perhaps they won't...
There is one other possibility: Conservative voters stay at home, or are attracted to a new UKIP-like party. That's quite plausible in the event of No Deal or of a soft Brexit.
edit: or what TSE said as I was typing...
Labour do need to learn the lessons of 2017 though. I think a key one is that a positive, bold and attractive policy offer is vital to set the agenda. Their tax promises on raising corporation tax and on high income earners were smart also as a dividing line with the Tories.
Attempting to be seen as 'sensible, centrist' etc. isn't as important, particularly when a lot of people are hurting economically.
But they can't count on TM running such a poor campaign, she looks to have sharpened up her operation and will surely not make blunders like the dementia tax...
I think also there may be a lot more scrutiny on Corbyn's succession arrangements. If the next election is in say 2020, is it credible that Corbyn (if he makes it that far) would serve a full parliament?
I am sure it will go well and his fellow partners will congratulate him on his rain-making suggestion that John McDonnell nationalise pensions which will undoubtedly bring in oodles of work for pensions lawyers for the foreseeable future.
That had ceased to be true in the closing week to ten days of the campaign when quite a few polls were pointing to the serious possibility of a Hung Parliament.
Therefore an extreme negative view is the default position.
I wonder if we'll see a Feb 74 type result with BOTH Conservatives and Labour down and two of the LDs, Greens and some UKIP-style party making advances in votes if not seats.
2015 provides an interesting exception. There was actually a (tiny) UK-wide swing to Labour, but it wasn't reflected in the seat changes due to one part of the country (Scotland) behaving very differently to the rest.
It's hard to see how Northern Ireland benefits economically from Brexit, even if the rest of the UK does very well. And it does particularly poorly out of No Deal Brexit. (Albeit the Republic probably does even worse.)
They merely need the Tories to lose votes. Whether to UKIP, the Lib Dems, the Greens, a new party, or even just sitting on their hands at home, it doesn't matter.
For example, if you got exactly the same votes for everyone other than the Tories, and the Tories lost 2 million votes:
Tories lose 41 seats to Labour, 3 to the Lib Dems, 2 to the SNP.
Con 271
Lab 303
SNP 37
LD 15
That on its own would make Labour favourite to take 10 Downing Street. Given as well that many of the SNP/Labour seats are very close in terms of majority, a handful of SNP voters staying home could put Corbyn very close to going over the top - with not a single extra vote being won.
Some of the Liberal advance in February 1974 was down to them contesting an additional 200 seats compared with 1970 - though there was also an underlying surge of support too.
Again we have no clear idea as to how many seats UKIP and the Greens will fight.
Bloody papists.
Reading some of their predictions quoted in threads earlier today shows a breathtaking level of self-delusion. "UK holds all the negotiating cards" "exact same benefits" etc etc etc.
It's very easy to talk about the importance of being British when you have a secure job. Being British is not so important if you're newly unemployed.
Of course, Northern Ireland is a small place. The UK can increase subsidies there to help them deal with the potential loss of cross border trade. But there will be losers. And some of them will be sore.
This was unacceptable to the majority of the HoC at the time and I suspect it still is - only Remainiacs seriously consider that it is acceptable.
The real question is how the hell May and Robbins got themselves to thinking a deal was imminent when basically it involved agreeing the very thing that May had sworn blind she would never accept.
https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1051831861264179200
In the absence of agreed solutions, as set out in the previous paragraph, the United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, unless, consistent with the 1998 Agreement, the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland. In all circumstances, the United Kingdom will continue to ensure the same unfettered access for Northern Ireland's businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf
How does a border in the Irish sea 'continue to ensure the same unfettered access for Northern Ireland's businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market.'?
After the shambles of the first backstop deal this was made crystal clear to May who accepted it and changed the wording so it referred to a UK backstop, not a NI one. That is what the agreement says despite the EU trying to claim to the contrary.
So May got Raab to go offering a UK backstop, albeit for a limited time. This was the most she could get past her Cabinet and it wasn't easy. The answer of no leaves her nowhere else to go. I suspect she is coming to the Commons to announce a series of measures based on the hypothesis that there will be now be no deal. She wants to do this today because she wants the EU to think this through before their meeting later this week. It is an incredible gamble but I really don't see any other options at this point.
Whether her government survives that announcement remains to be seen. Will Labour ask for a vote of no confidence? They probably should.
I must have missed the Antichrist.
It's also possible to argue May and Hammond have a magic money tree of their own with a big handout to the NHS (apparently).
The other key point you forget is Corbyn attracts support from those for whom the current economic model isn't working. While some on here break open the champagne because we are only borrowing £20-£30 billion a year and are growing at 2% per annum for many millions it's not even that substantial.
Both the Conservative and Labour Parties will have economic policies in their manifestos which will defy logic and reason but no one will care. The one that offers some optimism, hope and positivity will be listened to. This is what the "end of austerity" actually means - not the end of actual austerity but the end of the virtue of austerity.
Thought it was 3, but looks like Employment Qs to an empty House at the moment.
So, let's see who the antichrist could be:
Donald Tusk has two children, Michal and Katarzyna
Jean-Claude Juncker has no children
Guy Verhofstadt has two children, Charlotte and Louis
Merkel has no children, Macron has no children.
I'm not sure if women are allowed to be the antichrist.
Hence one of either Michal Tusk or Louis Verhofstadt must be the antichrist.
QED.
If she announces that no deal is where it's at, then maybe the Grievites, but there's still a suspicion that they consider marching up to the top of the hill as an act that primarily serves as preparation for marching back down again.
Would the Brexit negotiation really be so bad if led by the whore of Babylon? Would they duck leadership debates, or ride in on a seven headed beast and steal the show?
Dare I ask who your devil master was?
That said the DUP, for all their faults, are consistent and have an entirely logical position, they wish to be in the U.K. , U.K. single market and all, and handing them over without the consent of NI to the EU SM over which they would have no say is democratic non starter. If they are to pay customs dues to Brussels it’s taxation without representation. And that tends to lead to trouble for those trying to do the taxing.
Worth noting the Tsars considered Russia to be the Third Roman Empire. There are genuine historical links to the Eastern Roman Empire, but insufficient for such a strong claim to be upheld.
They are making a much better job of the tail wagging the dog in Government than the Lib Dems ever did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_vote_of_confidence_in_the_Major_ministry
Ken might get stuck in a Jazz club I suppose.
The timing may not exactly be ideal for the Tories coming up to key budget and meaningful Brexit votes, should Mackinlay be unable to participate.
I confess I'd forogtten this was still ongoing.