I have been having a think about how the LDs could have avoided Thursdays disaster and to be honest, I think ever since Labour came out unambiguously for a second referendum it holed them below the waterline. They were not going to be able to compete.
The only strategic error that probably lost them a few extra seats was the revoke policy, which was weird and felt a bit extreme. Bear in mind that most potential LD voters are pro-European and anti-Brexit anyway though, so I feel it probably only had a minimal contribution. Maybe it lost them a seat or two here or there, but nothing seismic.
Maybe they could have done a bit better with a leader other than Swinson, who the public didn’t seem to like all that much. Maybe portraying her as the next Prime Minister was a bit of a silly idea. Maybe spending half the campaign moaning about the debates wasn’t the best look. But really I think all this is fluff beyond the fact that they had an anti-Brexit horse and Jeremy Corbyn stood up, pulled out a revolver and shot it.
Hard to see how they could have helped that. But also hard to see where they go from here.
The Lib Dems refusal (and to be fair Labour's too) to work pragmatically even under the table (as per 1997), was what did it for them.
However, they do have now 100 close targets, so if Labour is prepared to be smart they can stop Johnson in 2024. But that's a tall order.
Maybe they should have said we’ll work with Labour and moderate Corbyn to strip out all the whacko policies. Perhaps that would have helped. But then people would just say “you can’t trust the LDs look at the last coalition” so they would have had a problem with that too I think.
The voters the Lib Dems were courting were more afraid of Corbyn than Brexit. If Labour has a leader the Lib Dems can get behind - as per Blair, Brown and Ed - then they'll be onto a winner.
With the current NEC,Momentum et al the chances of a Blair / Brown type leader are zero.
Update from Corbynland - apparently all over twitter it's being said a tory company was responsible for counting ballots all over the country. A company called idox.
So simple.
I've not seen the posts but this was put to me very sincerely.
Nah it was MI5, the have perfected the undetectable opening of ballot boxes and are the world's largest buyer of pencil erasers.
I have been having a think about how the LDs could have avoided Thursdays disaster and to be honest, I think ever since Labour came out unambiguously for a second referendum it holed them below the waterline. They were not going to be able to compete.
The only strategic error that probably lost them a few extra seats was the revoke policy, which was weird and felt a bit extreme. Bear in mind that most potential LD voters are pro-European and anti-Brexit anyway though, so I feel it probably only had a minimal contribution. Maybe it lost them a seat or two here or there, but nothing seismic.
Maybe they could have done a bit better with a leader other than Swinson, who the public didn’t seem to like all that much. Maybe portraying her as the next Prime Minister was a bit of a silly idea. Maybe spending half the campaign moaning about the debates wasn’t the best look. But really I think all this is fluff beyond the fact that they had an anti-Brexit horse and Jeremy Corbyn stood up, pulled out a revolver and shot it.
Hard to see how they could have helped that. But also hard to see where they go from here.
The Lib Dems refusal (and to be fair Labour's too) to work pragmatically even under the table (as per 1997), was what did it for them.
However, they do have now 100 close targets, so if Labour is prepared to be smart they can stop Johnson in 2024. But that's a tall order.
Maybe they should have said we’ll work with Labour and moderate Corbyn to strip out all the whacko policies. Perhaps that would have helped. But then people would just say “you can’t trust the LDs look at the last coalition” so they would have had a problem with that too I think.
The voters the Lib Dems were courting were more afraid of Corbyn than Brexit. If Labour has a leader the Lib Dems can get behind - as per Blair, Brown and Ed - then they'll be onto a winner.
With the current NEC,Momentum et al the chances of a Blair / Brown type leader are zero.
I admit it's a tall order. But I hope the PLP see some sense.
The BBC in recognizable form isn't going to survive a Johnson administration is it.
The BBC won't survive in any form if it doesn't reform. The telly tax is totally unenforceable in the modern world.
IIRC under-25s (it might have even been under-30s) watch more Netflix alone than ALL of the BBC's output combined. The idea that the BBC can simply carry on as usual is simply nuts.
Anybody who has kids, has friends with kids...It isn't even Netflix...its YouTube....There is a whole eco-system of YouTubbers who make daily videos which get millions of views and the kids tune in every day to get the next episode. It the first thing they do when they get in from school.
Can confirm this. I have two teen boys. It's Youtube and podcasts all the way. But they still get their news from the Beeb (wasn't the plan to split the BBC News away from everything else to avoid conflict of interest?)
Target 61 is Sedgefield. If Labour can't even take that back they're doomed.
That includes winning seats in Scotland which I think Labour needs to write off. It means winning a higher number of seats in England and Wales, it seems very unlikely.
To be fair, there were signs of life in 2017 for Labour in Scotland. Toxic Corbyn did it for them this time around but if they go hard against independence they can setup a USP again.
Corbyn wasn't really toxic in Scotland, it was just that he was seen as totally useless in the face of the BJ onslaught.
They need to ditch her from the front benches as quickly as they can. She is the epitome of the problem.
They need to ditch contempt for voters as quickly as they can.
It is worse for them than you even think. Because we are thick we need more "education" so we will get another effing university. They tried a "University of Cumbria" - that went well !
What we do need is another Pirelli's, we need the Energy Coast, we need Eden Project North. We need some really decent but affordable holiday accomodation ( declares interest here ). We do not need another effing university to house the students who were too thick to get into a decent university.
I think with the IRA, and probably more the racism, things, CCHQ may have allowed others to hold Lab to account.
AFAICS the antisemitism issue was driven by the specialist press and campaigners, rather than Tories.
I have seen several posts on social media claiming the election was rigged because “everyone seemed to be voting Labour this time.” This is what being in an echo chamber does to you.
EDIT: I would also say amongst the young urban professional and semi-professional classes, admitting to voting Tory this time would have been tantamount to social suicide, so I suspect a lot of people who were considering it kept quiet about their vote.
They need to ditch her from the front benches as quickly as they can. She is the epitome of the problem.
They need to ditch contempt for voters as quickly as they can.
It is worse for them than you even think. Because we are thick we need more "education" so we will get another effing university. They tried a "University of Cumbria" - that went well !
What we do need is another Pirelli's, we need the Energy Coast, we need Eden Project North. We need some really decent but affordable holiday accomodation ( declares interest here ). We do not need another effing university to house the students who were too thick to get into a decent university.
Oh, and we need holiday flights in and out of Carlisle airport.
Target 61 is Sedgefield. If Labour can't even take that back they're doomed.
That includes winning seats in Scotland which I think Labour needs to write off. It means winning a higher number of seats in England and Wales, it seems very unlikely.
To be fair, there were signs of life in 2017 for Labour in Scotland. Toxic Corbyn did it for them this time around but if they go hard against independence they can setup a USP again.
I think the Tories are becoming the default party of the Union in Scotland, I also think if the SNP push hard for a referendum it will be the Tories that benefit because it will be Boris telling Nicola to do one. Labour went into this election saying they might consider a referendum in return for being put into government, Unionist voters are going to punish them for that for a long time. It's a shame that Labour don't have a Scottish MP of real quality to lead them, that, IMO, would be the answer to a lot of questions.
Re: The IRA, remember Labour bizarrely decided to launch their manifesto in Birmingham on the anniversary of the pub bomings. That probably didn't help in reminding people about his associations.
I think I've lost some of my political judgement in this election, although I've made money (by 4 seats). I totally missed what was happening on the Red Wall.
So I put this out there as a question. Does not Boris' emphatic win mean that he will be able to silence the hard-right? He can shift quietly to the centre knowing he's not going to get defeated by 20 ERG types, with whom he does not naturally really agree.
I said throughout this campaign that the new intake who were going to be elected had all signed up to Boris's Deal - and beyond that, they were mostly One Nation Conservatives. I don't expect many to be joining the ERG, which will whither in importance one we leave on 31st January.
Boris will get a boost in popularity for delivering that Leave. 30 months of shameless Remain MPs ensured constant blocking, yet with many of them gone and his new intake in place, Boris gets us out after barely one month. He will have listened, he will have acted. Just what many of these new voters wanted - simply to be listened to. Loud and clear, says Boris - loud and clear.
He can do some radical stuff thereafter if he (and Cummins) turn their minds to it.
One Nation Tories or not is completely to miss the point. It was well articulated on the ITV coverage, sorry can't remember who, but something I said here the other side of the election. These seats were never going to be easy wins so the candidates were in the generality less career politicians but more hard working party members and activists. That means in turn that they have probably served in local government and probably understand the local community needs.
If those who thought they had the right to be Tory MPs were too often the A Listers then these are the anti-thesis of A Listers and I know of three at least who were actually prevented from taking a seat for 2010 because of an effing A Lister.
My dad often spoke about those who came into our area to show us common plebs how to farm - they generally went in 3 to 5 years. The A Listers came to show us how to run our Constituency Associations and win elections - they will not be missed, least of all Rory Stewart.
There was plenty of A listers who where councillors in 2010. Councillors in Westminster, Kensington, wandsworth. All Dave's mates and mates of Dave's mates.
I had a look at the 7 seats where Lib Dem came second to Labour in 2017 to see what happened. All are in England, and voted reman by between 64%-76%
Sheffield Hallam, Leads North West, Cambridge, Bermondsey and old Southwick, Vauxhall, Manchester Withington, Hornsey and wood Green.
I ad thought there might be big increases for the Lib Dems, even if they did not take them. Partly I thought that the Lib Dem revock policy might be popular, second the assumed unpopularity of Corbyn would be shared here.
But: to my surprises no, the Lib Dem vote when down in some and the increase in the Lib Dme vote was smaller than national increase in all bar one.
Any thought?
Could it be) a) That the Lib Dem party did not put resources in to these? as the focuses was on Tory seats? b) Perhaps Lab put a lot of effort in to keep them? c) Some 'one off' factors in each one? d) something else?
I also think Boris is going to surprise a lot of people with very large investment in green and renewable energy projects.
As I say, I am working for one to be the Tidal Lagoons.....
Hooray!!
I thought tidal lagoons had been evaluated as pink elephants more expensive than the vanity-nuclear?
Only when evaluated by those desperate to protect nuclear energy in this country.
When you you measure them on sensible metrics - for example they will barely be run in for their 125 year life cycle as the nuclear plants are being deactivated - then things look rather different.
The Rance tidal power station in Brittany, built in 1966, is today the cheapest power produced in France.
yes and if we cancelled the madness of Osbornes nuclear option to suck up to the Chinese it would mean cheaper electricity all round
I have been having a think about how the LDs could have avoided Thursdays disaster and to be honest, I think ever since Labour came out unambiguously for a second referendum it holed them below the waterline. They were not going to be able to compete.
The only strategic error that probably lost them a few extra seats was the revoke policy, which was weird and felt a bit extreme. Bear in mind that most potential LD voters are pro-European and anti-Brexit anyway though, so I feel it probably only had a minimal contribution. Maybe it lost them a seat or two here or there, but nothing seismic. It wouldn’t have stopped a Boris majority and it wouldn’t have taken the LDs to a pre-coalition seat count, or anywhere even near that.
Maybe they could have done a bit better with a leader other than Swinson, who the public didn’t seem to like all that much. Maybe portraying her as the next Prime Minister was a bit of a silly idea. Maybe spending half the campaign moaning about the debates wasn’t the best look. But really I think all this is fluff beyond the fact that they had an anti-Brexit horse and Jeremy Corbyn stood up, pulled out a revolver and shot it.
Hard to see how they could have helped that. But also hard to see where they go from here.
Revoke would have cost the LibDems enough tactical votes to lose Dunbartonshire E and Sheffield Hallam.
Policy announcment number one from Boris outside of Brexit to win over non metropolitan notherners. Take the £13.4 billion overseas budget. Strip out everything that doesnt serve a wider strategic/economic/diplomatic aim and divert the rest of it to social care, education etc.
I have been having a think about how the LDs could have avoided Thursdays disaster and to be honest, I think ever since Labour came out unambiguously for a second referendum it holed them below the waterline. They were not going to be able to compete.
The only strategic error that probably lost them a few extra seats was the revoke policy, which was weird and felt a bit extreme. Bear in mind that most potential LD voters are pro-European and anti-Brexit anyway though, so I feel it probably only had a minimal contribution. Maybe it lost them a seat or two here or there, but nothing seismic. It wouldn’t have stopped a Boris majority and it wouldn’t have taken the LDs to a pre-coalition seat count, or anywhere even near that.
Maybe they could have done a bit better with a leader other than Swinson, who the public didn’t seem to like all that much. Maybe portraying her as the next Prime Minister was a bit of a silly idea. Maybe spending half the campaign moaning about the debates wasn’t the best look. But really I think all this is fluff beyond the fact that they had an anti-Brexit horse and Jeremy Corbyn stood up, pulled out a revolver and shot it.
Hard to see how they could have helped that. But also hard to see where they go from here.
Revoke would have cost the LibDems enough tactical votes to lose Dunbartonshire E and Sheffield Hallam.
The Tories now closer in Hallam than at any point since 1992 (5013 away). No tactical votes for the Lib Dems there from this point out.
Then the reduction to 600 seats with very tight population limits is simply to ensure that *every* constituency is redrawn. There is nothing special about the number 600. It could as easily have been 500 or 700.
I am not sure about that.
In FPTP, I think there will be a preferred size of a constituency to maximise Tory bias (or Labour bias for that matter).
I imagine some work was done to look into this, and so I suspect there is a reason why it is 600.
Mixed up with "I can't vote Labour because of Corbyn" is his indisisive Brexit policy, their mad economic policy, concerns about security, anti semitism etc. It's a shorthand for everything they don't like about the current Labour party.
So I really don't hope they think if we simply appoint a likeable left wing leader with the same policies all will be o.k
I had a look at the 7 seats where Lib Dem came second to Labour in 2017 to see what happened. All are in England, and voted reman by between 64%-76%
Sheffield Hallam, Leads North West, Cambridge, Bermondsey and old Southwick, Vauxhall, Manchester Withington, Hornsey and wood Green.
I ad thought there might be big increases for the Lib Dems, even if they did not take them. Partly I thought that the Lib Dem revock policy might be popular, second the assumed unpopularity of Corbyn would be shared here.
But: to my surprises no, the Lib Dem vote when down in some and the increase in the Lib Dme vote was smaller than national increase in all bar one.
Any thought?
Could it be) a) That the Lib Dem party did not put resources in to these? as the focuses was on Tory seats? b) Perhaps Lab put a lot of effort in to keep them? c) Some 'one off' factors in each one? d) something else?
Revoke would have crippled attempts to get tactical votes from Conservatives and Leavers in those constituencies.
The loss of incumbency would have had an effect in Leeds NW.
Sheffield Hallam was a truly terrible result.
IIRC BJO said here that if the LibDems fail to regain Hallam then Swinson has 'shit the pot full'.
I have been having a think about how the LDs could have avoided Thursdays disaster and to be honest, I think ever since Labour came out unambiguously for a second referendum it holed them below the waterline. They were not going to be able to compete.
The only strategic error that probably lost them a few extra seats was the revoke policy, which was weird and felt a bit extreme. Bear in mind that most potential LD voters are pro-European and anti-Brexit anyway though, so I feel it probably only had a minimal contribution. Maybe it lost them a seat or two here or there, but nothing seismic. It wouldn’t have stopped a Boris majority and it wouldn’t have taken the LDs to a pre-coalition seat count, or anywhere even near that.
Maybe they could have done a bit better with a leader other than Swinson, who the public didn’t seem to like all that much. Maybe portraying her as the next Prime Minister was a bit of a silly idea. Maybe spending half the campaign moaning about the debates wasn’t the best look. But really I think all this is fluff beyond the fact that they had an anti-Brexit horse and Jeremy Corbyn stood up, pulled out a revolver and shot it.
Hard to see how they could have helped that. But also hard to see where they go from here.
I think they need to stand for something.
I don't know what they stand for any more. Even on Brexit, Jo Swinson said the policy was just to Revoke, but the local leaflet said they would give people the final say. And that was meant to be the "USP."
I think Labour's huge problem is still Scotland. Labour needs to win 30-40 seats in Scotland to get a majority, I don't know how realistic that is. Which means they are forever going to need to be in a Faustian pact with the SNP which is voter poison in middle England. That picture of EdM in Salmond's pocket is still relevant.
I honestly don't see a path to a Labour minority unless they make nice with the Lib Dems and hope the Lib Dems start their fight back against the Tories.
There is no path to power for Labour which includes separatist parties in its coalition. They will get smashed to pieces by the electorate in England and Wales if they enable separatist movements.
Or, they need to absolutely knock it out the park in England and Wales and gain 125 seats next time.
Nope. Me neither.
And that's what I mean, what's target seat 125 in England and Wales? It must be something ridiculous like Surrey Heath.
Target 125 for Labour in England and Wales is Somerset North East Target 126 is the even more ridiculous for Labour Derbyshire North East.
What's target 60? 60 would be enough to force a minority Government on a 5.5% swing.
Including Scotland
60 Milton Keynes South 61 is Sedgefield !
Excl Scotland it is Old Lady Brady's seat.
Derbyshire north east and Somerset north east are both former mining areas.
I also think Boris is going to surprise a lot of people with very large investment in green and renewable energy projects.
To be fair to him, this is one very important way in which he is perhaps not ‘Britain Trump’. I sincerely hope that the UK stays positively engaged in the global climate debate.
This is something which has been happening for years.
One of the surprises for me is how the Greens and the LibDems amongst others, including Extinction Rebellion, have indulged in a patently false rhetoric of "nothing has been done".
We are firmly at the top of the European league tables on that one, apart from a couple of Scandinavian resource economies with tiny populations.
If done right, the Greenery should be an easy win.
If you fly a lot (like me) you see huge and increasing volumes of massive wind turbines surrounding the british coastline. We have a resource here like pretty much no other country and are capitalising on it. The next stage to zero net carbon is upgrading our electricity grid to allow us to convert from gas heating to electric which is going to take a while along with increasing electric vehicles. My 4.2L V8 german gas guzzler is likely the last petrol car I will ever buy.
I have been having a think about how the LDs could have avoided Thursdays disaster and to be honest, I think ever since Labour came out unambiguously for a second referendum it holed them below the waterline. They were not going to be able to compete.
The only strategic error that probably lost them a few extra seats was the revoke policy, which was weird and felt a bit extreme. Bear in mind that most potential LD voters are pro-European and anti-Brexit anyway though, so I feel it probably only had a minimal contribution. Maybe it lost them a seat or two here or there, but nothing seismic. It wouldn’t have stopped a Boris majority and it wouldn’t have taken the LDs to a pre-coalition seat count, or anywhere even near that.
Maybe they could have done a bit better with a leader other than Swinson, who the public didn’t seem to like all that much. Maybe portraying her as the next Prime Minister was a bit of a silly idea. Maybe spending half the campaign moaning about the debates wasn’t the best look. But really I think all this is fluff beyond the fact that they had an anti-Brexit horse and Jeremy Corbyn stood up, pulled out a revolver and shot it.
Hard to see how they could have helped that. But also hard to see where they go from here.
I think they need to stand for something.
I don't know what they stand for any more. Even on Brexit, Jo Swinson said the policy was just to Revoke, but the local leaflet said they would give people the final say. And that was meant to be the "USP."
The belief was a single issue policy, Brexit would work in the same way as scrapping tuition fees & before that opposition to the Iraq war.
Can anyone remember any of their other policies or were they covered in other parties manifestos?
One really surprising thing about the Labour post-mortems: how many of them mention Corbyn's association with the IRA, and its toxicity in working class seats
We dismissed this blemish, on here, as priced in and irrelevant. We were totally wrong, voters hadn't really noticed the taint before, but this time they took a proper look at Corbyn's backstory, and they were repelled.
The only pb-er who mentioned this possibility before the vote, I believe, was Southam.
Yes, fair point. May will be very annoyed no one cares last time.
Target 61 is Sedgefield. If Labour can't even take that back they're doomed.
That includes winning seats in Scotland which I think Labour needs to write off. It means winning a higher number of seats in England and Wales, it seems very unlikely.
To be fair, there were signs of life in 2017 for Labour in Scotland. Toxic Corbyn did it for them this time around but if they go hard against independence they can setup a USP again.
No, left wing Yes voters thought it was safe to vote for corbyn in 2017 after not being enthused by the non-indy focused SNP campaign.
Those voters came back to the SNP this time out. They still like the Corbs. Plenty of SNP members like Corbyn.
Comments
With the current NEC,Momentum et al the chances of a Blair / Brown type leader are zero.
AFAICS the antisemitism issue was driven by the specialist press and campaigners, rather than Tories.
What we do need is another Pirelli's, we need the Energy Coast, we need Eden Project North. We need some really decent but affordable holiday accomodation ( declares interest here ). We do not need another effing university to house the students who were too thick to get into a decent university.
EDIT: I would also say amongst the young urban professional and semi-professional classes, admitting to voting Tory this time would have been tantamount to social suicide, so I suspect a lot of people who were considering it kept quiet about their vote.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/15/i-own-this-disaster-john-mcdonnell-tries-to-shield-corbyn-rebecca-long-bailey
Wasn't that the motto of the Provisional IRA? (Tiocfaidh ár lá)
I suppose he no longer even has to hide it now.
I had a look at the 7 seats where Lib Dem came second to Labour in 2017 to see what happened. All are in England, and voted reman by between 64%-76%
Sheffield Hallam, Leads North West, Cambridge, Bermondsey and old Southwick, Vauxhall, Manchester Withington, Hornsey and wood Green.
I ad thought there might be big increases for the Lib Dems, even if they did not take them. Partly I thought that the Lib Dem revock policy might be popular, second the assumed unpopularity of Corbyn would be shared here.
But: to my surprises no, the Lib Dem vote when down in some and the increase in the Lib Dme vote was smaller than national increase in all bar one.
Any thought?
Could it be)
a) That the Lib Dem party did not put resources in to these? as the focuses was on Tory seats?
b) Perhaps Lab put a lot of effort in to keep them?
c) Some 'one off' factors in each one?
d) something else?
NEW THREAD
In FPTP, I think there will be a preferred size of a constituency to maximise Tory bias (or Labour bias for that matter).
I imagine some work was done to look into this, and so I suspect there is a reason why it is 600.
Mixed up with "I can't vote Labour because of Corbyn" is his indisisive Brexit policy, their mad economic policy, concerns about security, anti semitism etc. It's a shorthand for everything they don't like about the current Labour party.
So I really don't hope they think if we simply appoint a likeable left wing leader with the same policies all will be o.k
The loss of incumbency would have had an effect in Leeds NW.
Sheffield Hallam was a truly terrible result.
IIRC BJO said here that if the LibDems fail to regain Hallam then Swinson has 'shit the pot full'.
She really did.
I don't know what they stand for any more. Even on Brexit, Jo Swinson said the policy was just to Revoke, but the local leaflet said they would give people the final say. And that was meant to be the "USP."
Isn't that interesting.
The belief was a single issue policy, Brexit would work in the same way as scrapping tuition fees & before that opposition to the Iraq war.
Can anyone remember any of their other policies or were they covered in other parties manifestos?
Are they orange book or no book these days?
Those voters came back to the SNP this time out. They still like the Corbs. Plenty of SNP members like Corbyn.