Interesting thread header @david_herdson. It feels to me like there’s a bit of making what actually happened fit the prediction but I certainly couldn’t have done better.
I look forward to your predictions for 2020 - surely easier for this coming decade now:
Ten years of increasingly unpopular Tory government
UK stuck in BINO-land
Economy continues to underperform relative to OECD
Sindyref2 narrowly lost by the Nats
Labour slowly gravitates back to soft left Blairism
Trump re-elected for another equally ineffective term as POTUS ☹️
Mr. Observer, the two main parties got over 80% in 2017 and over 75% in 2019. That's pretty broad.
Shift to PR and parties would fracture, leading to a far greater number of smaller parties, far more subjugated to the whims of activists (and that worked so well when it happened to Labour). The electorate would then vote, after which the political class would barter with one another, negotiating which one(s) would form the government.
The electorate would have no say in that discussion. Parties would be free (and perhaps even compelled) to jettison the policies which had earnt them the votes in the first place. That's less democratic, rather than more.
And if you have four parties on 30%, 25%, 25%, and 20% there's no guarantee at all the most popular party would even be in government.
FPTP has its flaws, but they aren't nearly so numerous as those of PR.
Mr. Observer, the Conservatives got about 9 percentage points more than Labour in 2005 with a majority about 20-30 higher.
Also, our system is based on seats not percentages. Everyone knows this. If some parties are inept at understanding how this affects, or should affect, campaigning then it's their own damned fault if they do poorly.
It was the strength of the LDs at GE2005 that made the "system" seem anti-Tory. The decline of the yellows from GE2015 has reversed that
The system is unrepresentative - just in different ways from time to time.
No one cared when UKIP got 1 MP for 13% of the vote for 0.15% of the representation in 2015. In fact, many people were moaning that Farage was on QT too often while that discrepancy was in place.
"Under FPTP good second places are worthless... " was the PB mantra. Now the Lib Dems are doing that, it's a great sign of progress of course, a beacon of light for the future...
Simply wrong. Many of us have supported PR for a long time.
Quite. PR has many fairweather supporters but I suspect genuine supporters are overrrpresented on PB.
I always believed in electoral reform with a preference for STV.
However the debacle of the last three years has convinced me that there is an argument in strong government and winner takes all in FPTP.
We've seen what it looks like when governments fail to achieve a majority, when parliament is deadlocked, when a small number of extremist MPs can hold a government to ransom, when junior coalition partners are able to demand huge amounts from the government.
And it hasn't been pretty. Do we really want an eternity of fractious coalitions and in-fighting? One of the worst things about Brexit is that it appears the business of government outside of Brexit has completely stopped.
And the kicker, if one was needed, is that PR would have delivered us a Con/Farage coalition, which would have arguably been more extreme and more divisive. In a world where people are tacking to the extremes, I'm not comfortable with a system that potentially puts extremists in power. Imagine if 10% of the population voted for Anne Marie Waters or the BNP...
The brexit debacle has made me change my mind a lot on PR. I'm not sure what I system I support yet, but it's given me pause for thought.
Labour’s decade of disaster was made by Len McCluskey in 2010 and Len spent the next nine years doing all he could to make things even worse. Just why a wealthy old man on a fixed income and an interest in property would want to do so much to boost the Tories is quite beyond me!!
Bloody hell, are we really rehashing the "only X percent of the population voted for this" argument?!
We won. Deal with it. Tories dealt with it for 13 years. It's up to your party to find a formula that works and how to get 44% people to vote for you like Blair did in 1997 or Boris just now.
It's not out fault that Labour has been taken over by the hard left, you let them in.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
FF43, exactly , best to accept the inevitable and make it a real easy changeover and setup up real relationships for the future. Unfortunately I just cannot see the Tories doing that they will fight it to the bitter end and poison the well first rather than have a friendly separation.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
Interesting thread header @david_herdson. It feels to me like there’s a bit of making what actually happened fit the prediction but I certainly couldn’t have done better.
I look forward to your predictions for 2020 - surely easier for this coming decade now:
Ten years of increasingly unpopular Tory government
UK stuck in BINO-land
Economy continues to underperform relative to OECD
Sindyref2 narrowly lost by the Nats
Labour slowly gravitates back to soft left Blairism
Trump re-elected for another equally ineffective term as POTUS ☹️
Not sure about 2 and 4. 5 might be highly optimistic too!
Biggest political issue of the next decade - privacy and technology.
Do countries become more like China, where the writings of George Orwell are treated as instruction manuals? If governments don’t track you constantly themselves, can they do anything about the massive private invasions of privacy and unaccountability that are Facebook and Google? Can fake news be eliminated while keeping freedom of speech? Will fake videos lead to even more distrust of content? Will media be able to get back towards actually practicing journalism, rather than simply chasing clickbait headlines? Will political opponents be able to engage with each other, instead of talking exclusively within their own digital echo-chambers? Can governments even keep up with the speed at which technology progresses?
I suspect that the flash points for most of the above are going to be the US elections in 2020 and 2024. Most of the issues identified are bigger problems in that country than elsewhere.
Mr. Observer, the two main parties got over 80% in 2017 and over 75% in 2019. That's pretty broad.
Shift to PR and parties would fracture, leading to a far greater number of smaller parties, far more subjugated to the whims of activists (and that worked so well when it happened to Labour). The electorate would then vote, after which the political class would barter with one another, negotiating which one(s) would form the government.
The electorate would have no say in that discussion. Parties would be free (and perhaps even compelled) to jettison the policies which had earnt them the votes in the first place. That's less democratic, rather than more.
And if you have four parties on 30%, 25%, 25%, and 20% there's no guarantee at all the most popular party would even be in government.
FPTP has its flaws, but they aren't nearly so numerous as those of PR.
For me the biggest issue is the wasted vote syndrome. Having lived in very safe seats most of my life I have usually felt voting was for my own conscience, no other reason.
I like the header, David, What big event will dominate the politics of the next decade ? Still Brexit ?
Climate change. Parties and governments that get caught on the wrong side of the issue will get wiped out.
But which is the wrong side? I feel that the term "environmentalist" has been corrupted somewhat, so that it has become to mean "anti-capitalist". The UK cannot, of course, solve the problem of the 1% rise in global temperatures over the last century by itself. If onerous regulations and costs are applied to UK subjects, thus disadvantaging the country versus others, this will not go down well with the electorate.
As a deep ecologist, like others I see the main issue as loss of bio-diversity which is linked to habitat loss due to homo sapien numbers. This is not being discussed because water-melon environmentalists keep banging on about climate change because it suits their anti-western virtue-signalling bias. Bizarrely - they see any discussion around human overpopulation as racist.
Extinction Rebellion is the best environmentalist group I have found so far. At least it puts loss of bio-diversity front and centre (in their title) and recognises that democracy will never solve the planet`s problem: that it is being destroyed by one rapacious species.
They also say nonsense such as “we have five years left”. They are a millenarian doomsday cult comprised of paid agitators, the mentally ill and those of feeble minds.
I see Lisa Nandy 's making a fool of herself over IDS and UC. When is anyone in the Labour party going to grow up and focus their energy on the middle of the road people who told them to sod the f*** off the other week?
Didn't IDS introduce Universal credit that's proved to be a fecking disaster?
Bit like Cooper being touted as Labour leader who introduced HIPS.. another fecking diasater.
Not at all - it has encouraged people to work and solve their own problems instead of expecting everyone else to continually bail them out. Of course I'm exaggerating for effect just to goad the losers on here. But it is very frustrating to be hearing again the lack of understanding of the mindset of those who voted Tory last week. They aren't cruel, heartless or thick. They simply want more fairness and less focus on handouts and hand-wringing. To pretend that the social security sytem pre-UC was somehow a good thing simply beggars belief.
Whilst I completely agree with the latter sentiment making people with nothing wait so long for relief is unacceptable and piling them up with "loans" or advances affecting future benefits is not an answer that is fit for purpose. Too much of our benefits are still going to the middle classes (in work benefits and pension reliefs) and the old (where to start, the list is endless). We need to focus more of the available resource on those genuinely in need.
I came across a statistic, which of course I can't find, which I think says that pension age benefits are now 230% of working age benefits, when twenty or so years ago they were 130%.
As I tell my local LibDdem group, liberals start from a great position ideologically. We live in a liberal democracy and ideologically I`d estimate that 35% of the electorate are ideologically liberal (50% conservative, 15% collectivist). Yet the LibDems punch below their weight whist the collectivist party (Labour) collects votes from folk who are not ideologically collectivist due to family tradition, union ties etc.
Is there a plausible combination of political and *geographical* ground for the Lib Dems to aim for? Given the FPTP system I think you need both (as the SNP and UKIP show, an evenly spread 10-15% support is much worse than a tightly concentrated 5%). For the SNP the political principle and the geographical support base naturally go hand in hand, but what might the LDs try for? One possibility would be "well-educated university towns and leafy London suburbs" (which most of their non-scottish current seats roughly are) coupled with a left-leaning liberalism targeted at that sort of middle-class educated well-off voter. But right now Labour is pretty firmly also sat on that demographic and those areas, so it's not such an appealing target. Are there other better possibilities?
Mr. Observer, Labour got 43% of the vote in 1997, and a landslide.
PR is a great way to fragment politics and atomise parties, as well as moving power away from the electorate and towards a political class that barters authority amongst itself.
An excellent comment
FPTP rewards one party with
100% of the power
based on winning
56% of the seats
based on
44% of the popular vote
representing
29% of the electorate.
You were not suggesting PR when Blair was winning majorities, i'll be bound.
I absolutely was. Big majorities inflate egos, reduce scrutiny and lead to bad government.
Boris needs to remember he is not popular. 71% of the election did not vote for him. If he remembers that he will be more effective.
The same was true for Blair.
"71% of the election did not vote for him"
It was 57% of the election that didn't vote for him
I see Lisa Nandy 's making a fool of herself over IDS and UC. When is anyone in the Labour party going to grow up and focus their energy on the middle of the road people who told them to sod the f*** off the other week?
Didn't IDS introduce Universal credit that's proved to be a fecking disaster?
Bit like Cooper being touted as Labour leader who introduced HIPS.. another fecking diasater.
Not at all - it has encouraged people to work and solve their own problems instead of expecting everyone else to continually bail them out. Of course I'm exaggerating for effect just to goad the losers on here. But it is very frustrating to be hearing again the lack of understanding of the mindset of those who voted Tory last week. They aren't cruel, heartless or thick. They simply want more fairness and less focus on handouts and hand-wringing. To pretend that the social security sytem pre-UC was somehow a good thing simply beggars belief.
Whilst I completely agree with the latter sentiment making people with nothing wait so long for relief is unacceptable and piling them up with "loans" or advances affecting future benefits is not an answer that is fit for purpose. Too much of our benefits are still going to the middle classes (in work benefits and pension reliefs) and the old (where to start, the list is endless). We need to focus more of the available resource on those genuinely in need.
I came across a statistic, which of course I can't find, which I think says that pension age benefits are now 230% of working age benefits, when twenty or so years ago they were 130%.
Its appalling and unsustainable. The generation paying for it certainly won't get anything close.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
Bloody hell, are we really rehashing the "only X percent of the population voted for this" argument?!
We won. Deal with it. Tories dealt with it for 13 years. It's up to your party to find a formula that works and how to get 44% people to vote for you like Blair did in 1997 or Boris just now.
It's not out fault that Labour has been taken over by the hard left, you let them in.
Yep, I agree. The argument began, though, with a claim that a party voted for by 44% of the electorate was the nation.
Mr. Observer, Labour got 43% of the vote in 1997, and a landslide.
PR is a great way to fragment politics and atomise parties, as well as moving power away from the electorate and towards a political class that barters authority amongst itself.
An excellent comment
FPTP rewards one party with
100% of the power
based on winning
56% of the seats
based on
44% of the popular vote
representing
29% of the electorate.
You were not suggesting PR when Blair was winning majorities, i'll be bound.
I absolutely was. Big majorities inflate egos, reduce scrutiny and lead to bad government.
Boris needs to remember he is not popular. 71% of the election did not vote for him. If he remembers that he will be more effective.
The same was true for Blair.
"71% of the election did not vote for him"
It was 57% of the election that didn't vote for him
Autocorrect, election = electorate, sorry for confusion. Turnout was 67%
The next Welsh Senedd elections in 2021 may prove to be the most difficult yet for Labour.
1. They have been in power continuously since 1999, over two decades. This is plenty of time to have actually started to fix some of the problems Wales has. In fact, it would be hard to point to any definite & real achievements over the 20 years. They have presided over decay in education & health & the economy.
2.They have an unpopular leader in Mark Drakeford.
3.Their Westminster majorities -- even in the Valleys seats -- are now sharply down. The trend has been against Labour, albeit slowly, for decades now. These South Walian seats are nearing tipping point.
4. Welsh voters have been much more inclined to vote against Labour for Assembly elections than Westminster.
5 And finally boundary changes for Westminster are likely to lead to some disgruntled Labour MPs who will lose out, and end up eager to rock the boat.
Against that, Labour may have chosen wisely for their Westminster leader & may receive a polling bounce -- but then again, they may not & may be engaged in internecine bloodletting.
Mr. Observer, Labour got almost as large a majority with 35% of the vote in 2005. And in 2001 they also had a landslide, on just 41%.
The Conservative majority is far more modest, despite having a higher percentage of votes (if that's the stat that floats your boat) than Labour had in 1997 and 2001.
Yes, I understand FPTP does not deliver election results that reflect the views of the electorate. That’s why I’ve consistently opposed it for my entire adult life.
But it does
The most popular candidate in each constituency is chose as the representative of that constituency
You think there should be a national electorate. I argue that regions are different
Mr. Observer, Labour got almost as large a majority with 35% of the vote in 2005. And in 2001 they also had a landslide, on just 41%.
The Conservative majority is far more modest, despite having a higher percentage of votes (if that's the stat that floats your boat) than Labour had in 1997 and 2001.
Yes, I understand FPTP does not deliver election results that reflect the views of the electorate. That’s why I’ve consistently opposed it for my entire adult life.
But it does
The most popular candidate in each constituency is chose as the representative of that constituency
You think there should be a national electorate. I argue that regions are different
I like the header, David, What big event will dominate the politics of the next decade ? Still Brexit ?
Climate change. Parties and governments that get caught on the wrong side of the issue will get wiped out.
But which is the wrong side? I feel that the term "environmentalist" has been corrupted somewhat, so that it has become to mean "anti-capitalist". The UK cannot, of course, solve the problem of the 1% rise in global temperatures over the last century by itself. If onerous regulations and costs are applied to UK subjects, thus disadvantaging the country versus others, this will not go down well with the electorate.
As a deep ecologist, like others I see the main issue as loss of bio-diversity which is linked to habitat loss due to homo sapien numbers. This is not being discussed because water-melon environmentalists keep banging on about climate change because it suits their anti-western virtue-signalling bias. Bizarrely - they see any discussion around human overpopulation as racist.
Extinction Rebellion is the best environmentalist group I have found so far. At least it puts loss of bio-diversity front and centre (in their title) and recognises that democracy will never solve the planet`s problem: that it is being destroyed by one rapacious species.
They also say nonsense such as “we have five years left”. They are a millenarian doomsday cult comprised of paid agitators, the mentally ill and those of feeble minds.
Well - yes- but there is an emergency and action is needed now. It`s just that the emergency is loss of biodiversity not climate change.
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
We are doing no better and no worse than other Countries AFAICS.
Being no more shite than anyone else; at last, a realistic Brexit aspiration.
1) Brexit will still be a big issue. 2) Negative growth for at least one quarter in 2019. 3) The May deal will not pass. 4) A deal will pass, with a proviso that there will be a referendum on it. 5) We won't leave in March but may do later. 6) There will be a general election this year.
Not too bad. I definitely didn't foresee Boris as PM - did anyone predict that?
Everyone was busy laying him.
Except those of us with a modicum of understanding of the Conservative Party. And a vote.
One of this site's major failings is seeing Tory disaster round every corner. Based on hope, not analysis.
It seems to have passed without comment here from the leader writers that THE betting event of the 2019 GE was laying LibDem seats. From 44 seats. Who could possibly have predicted that "Prime Minister Jo Swinson" and Revoke were going down like a cup of cold sick outside the M25? And who did a detailed regional post where they came close to getting the LibDem seats spot on (that person didn't believe they could be quite so crap as to not win Sheffield Hallam....although fair play to TSE for saying it wasn't proving quite the shoo-in)
The betting events of 2010 GE, 2015 GE and 2017 GE were also to lay LibDem seats.
Mr. Observer, the Conservatives got about 9 percentage points more than Labour in 2005 with a majority about 20-30 higher.
Also, our system is based on seats not percentages. Everyone knows this. If some parties are inept at understanding how this affects, or should affect, campaigning then it's their own damned fault if they do poorly.
It was the strength of the LDs at GE2005 that made the "system" seem anti-Tory. The decline of the yellows from GE2015 has reversed that
Mike, as liberal it`s so frustrating.
As I tell my local LibDdem group, liberals start from a great position ideologically. We live in a liberal democracy and ideologically I`d estimate that 35% of the electorate are ideologically liberal (50% conservative, 15% collectivist). Yet the LibDems punch below their weight whist the collectivist party (Labour) collects votes from folk who are not ideologically collectivist due to family tradition, union ties etc.
The LibDems need to dust off their copies of J.S Mill and start there: individual flourishment, equality of status, economically prudent, law-abiding, centre ground on the left/right axis.
Equally important they need to pick their targets. Labour is the party they had a chance of replacing in 2017 and 2019 but they focused all their fire and ire on the Conservatives. Massive strategic error.
It was very disappointing to see Jo Swinson on TV apologising for their time in coalition.
Indeed. Clegg, Alexander, Webb, Lamb, they all contributed positively and greatly to the Coalition's success.
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
We are doing no better and no worse than other Countries AFAICS.
Well that’s absolutely no excuse. We should be challenging not hiding behind such fig leafs.
I don't think that is true.
In terms of C02 reductions we are some considerable way ahead of any other major European economy - the last time I checked the data.
In absolute terms France may be lower but that is because of their nuclear sector.
I think an important priority is to face down a movement of Greenies which does not really engage reason, but just focuses on taking up the most extreme position of anyone, and squawking like parakeets. to make us all obey the latest demand.
Some of the interviews broadcast during the Extinction Rebellion pillock parade were hugely enlightening - they really do seem to be (on the whole) gullibles or thickies.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
Mr. Observer, the two main parties got over 80% in 2017 and over 75% in 2019. That's pretty broad.
Shift to PR and parties would fracture, leading to a far greater number of smaller parties, far more subjugated to the whims of activists (and that worked so well when it happened to Labour). The electorate would then vote, after which the political class would barter with one another, negotiating which one(s) would form the government.
The electorate would have no say in that discussion. Parties would be free (and perhaps even compelled) to jettison the policies which had earnt them the votes in the first place. That's less democratic, rather than more.
And if you have four parties on 30%, 25%, 25%, and 20% there's no guarantee at all the most popular party would even be in government.
FPTP has its flaws, but they aren't nearly so numerous as those of PR.
Of course the Tories and Labour get most of the votes. They get million of them because FPTP encourages a vote for the least worst option. I love the idea that parties don’t currently jettison policies that won them votes!!
Bloody hell, are we really rehashing the "only X percent of the population voted for this" argument?!
We won. Deal with it. Tories dealt with it for 13 years. It's up to your party to find a formula that works and how to get 44% people to vote for you like Blair did in 1997 or Boris just now.
It's not out fault that Labour has been taken over by the hard left, you let them in.
I don't recall Blair saying, "We won. Deal with it." Not very inclusive or likely to get the sceptical, but could be convinced, to your side
Mr. Observer, the Conservatives got about 9 percentage points more than Labour in 2005 with a majority about 20-30 higher.
Also, our system is based on seats not percentages. Everyone knows this. If some parties are inept at understanding how this affects, or should affect, campaigning then it's their own damned fault if they do poorly.
It was the strength of the LDs at GE2005 that made the "system" seem anti-Tory. The decline of the yellows from GE2015 has reversed that
The system is unrepresentative - just in different ways from time to time.
No one cared when UKIP got 1 MP for 13% of the vote for 0.15% of the representation in 2015. In fact, many people were moaning that Farage was on QT too often while that discrepancy was in place.
"Under FPTP good second places are worthless... " was the PB mantra. Now the Lib Dems are doing that, it's a great sign of progress of course, a beacon of light for the future...
Simply wrong. Many of us have supported PR for a long time.
PR permanent left wing coalition.. no thanks.
You are saying there’s a permanent left wing majority among the electorate ?
I am saying you are deliberately misreading or misinterpreting what I meant. You are not stupid, so try again.
How is Nigel doing that? If you believe PR would lead to a permanent left wing coalition (an opinion) and PR means proportional representation (a fact) then the logical corollary is that in your opinion there is a permanent left wing majority.
There are opinions and they differ. There are facts and they don't and there is logic which can be applied to both facts and opinions. If applied to facts the deductions are also facts. If applied to opinions the result is still an opinion, but correct if the original opinion is assumed to be correct.
Nigel's post was a logical deduction from your post.
As someone whose degree was studying logic it is a pleasure to post to a site where most arguments are logical, but it is frustrating when one sees illogical posts. HYFUD is the worst example. He can't distinguish between fact and opinion and is incapable of a logical argument. Frustratingly this is true even when he is right!!!
Mr. Pointer, plenty of seats swung in non-traditional ways in 1997 and 2019. In 2010, I think, my own seat changed from a 10k Labour majority to a thousand or so.
The only way to guarantee your vote isn't for a winner is not to vote.
The problem with PR is that once you've given your vote it doesn't determine the government, it determines how the parties negotiate and throw away some of their policies whilst accepting those of other parties. And if you voted for X because you think their education policy is great and they jettison it, you can't do anything about that. You can't even be mad about it because the whole system is designed to hack every manifesto to pieces and make the programme of government a Frankenstein's monster.
I see Lisa Nandy 's making a fool of herself over IDS and UC. When is anyone in the Labour party going to grow up and focus their energy on the middle of the road people who told them to sod the f*** off the other week?
For the SNP the political principle and the geographical support base naturally go hand in hand, but what might the LDs try for? One possibility would be "well-educated university towns and leafy London suburbs" (which most of their non-scottish current seats roughly are) coupled with a left-leaning liberalism targeted at that sort of middle-class educated well-off voter. But right now Labour is pretty firmly also sat on that demographic and those areas, so it's not such an appealing target. Are there other better possibilities?
Both Labour & the LibDems are fishing in the same pond for middle-class, educated voters in University & metropolitan seats.
There are ponds that are under-fished. Not ones particularly sympathetic to the LibDems, though.
Mr. Pointer, plenty of seats swung in non-traditional ways in 1997 and 2019. In 2010, I think, my own seat changed from a 10k Labour majority to a thousand or so.
The only way to guarantee your vote isn't for a winner is not to vote.
The problem with PR is that once you've given your vote it doesn't determine the government, it determines how the parties negotiate and throw away some of their policies whilst accepting those of other parties. And if you voted for X because you think their education policy is great and they jettison it, you can't do anything about that. You can't even be mad about it because the whole system is designed to hack every manifesto to pieces and make the programme of government a Frankenstein's monster.
But it seems to work reasonably ok across much of Europe (some better than others admittedly).
If we're talking about our long term forecasts can I point out that back in 2007 when the Cameroons were thinking that the denizens of Islington wine bars were the key to Conservative election victories I was mentioning the 'West Virginiaisation' of UK politics and that Bassetlaw, Derbyshire NE, Don Valley, Penistone and Rother Valley were the route they should take.
Mr. Observer, when parties throw away a policy in their manifesto under FPTP they can be held to account next time round. Under PR, that's not the case because the system is predicated on manifestos being aspirations and bargaining chips.
Labour tossing out the referendum promise, for example, didn't necessarily work out to their advantage.
If we're talking about our long term forecasts can I point out that back in 2007 when the Cameroons were thinking that the denizens of Islington wine bars were the key to Conservative election victories I was mentioning the 'West Virginiaisation' of UK politics and that Bassetlaw, Derbyshire NE, Don Valley, Penistone and Rother Valley were the route they should take.
I see Lisa Nandy 's making a fool of herself over IDS and UC. When is anyone in the Labour party going to grow up and focus their energy on the middle of the road people who told them to sod the f*** off the other week?
Mr. Observer, Labour got almost as large a majority with 35% of the vote in 2005. And in 2001 they also had a landslide, on just 41%.
The Conservative majority is far more modest, despite having a higher percentage of votes (if that's the stat that floats your boat) than Labour had in 1997 and 2001.
Yes, I understand FPTP does not deliver election results that reflect the views of the electorate. That’s why I’ve consistently opposed it for my entire adult life.
But it does
The most popular candidate in each constituency is chose as the representative of that constituency
You think there should be a national electorate. I argue that regions are different
Ah yes, the playwright who made a star of Dominic Cummings in Brexit: the Uncivil War.
He’s also got a long list of other credits to his name, both political and non political
Such a shame you chose to cast doubt on his achievement to make a political dig
Well said, Charles. James Graham is best known for his play "This House", about the minority Labour Government of the 70s and its eventual defeat. It played at the National and a few years later at Chichester. I saw both versions (the first by live link) and it is a superb piece of theatre.
Mr. Observer, when parties throw away a policy in their manifesto under FPTP they can be held to account next time round. Under PR, that's not the case because the system is predicated on manifestos being aspirations and bargaining chips.
Labour tossing out the referendum promise, for example, didn't necessarily work out to their advantage.
Ah yes, the playwright who made a star of Dominic Cummings in Brexit: the Uncivil War.
He’s also got a long list of other credits to his name, both political and non political
Such a shame you chose to cast doubt on his achievement to make a political dig
Well said, Charles. James Graham is best known for his play "This House", about the minority Labour Government of the 70s and its eventual defeat. It played at the National and a few years later at Chichester. I saw both versions (the first by live link) and it is a superb piece of theatre.
I saw that by chance at the National when in London one night with work and at a loss for what to do. Absolutely brilliant theatre - can’t wait for it to be revived.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
Presumably we'd be in with a head start with the fantastic bonus of being part of the Union for 300+ years?
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
It’s probably been the best decade for humanity in the entire history of mankind.
No “probably” about that.
On almost any meaningful statistic (mortality, poverty, war, technology) the world’s population is far better off today than at any time in the past.
It’s something often overlooked in rich countries experiencing what’s seen as little more than stagnation.
I see Lisa Nandy 's making a fool of herself over IDS and UC. When is anyone in the Labour party going to grow up and focus their energy on the middle of the road people who told them to sod the f*** off the other week?
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
Presumably we'd be in with a head start with the fantastic bonus of being part of the Union for 300+ years?
Norway had the "fantastic bonus" of been in a Union with Denmark and then in one with Sweden for 500 odd years!
Of course, it is now richer than both Sweden and Denmark.
If we're talking about our long term forecasts can I point out that back in 2007 when the Cameroons were thinking that the denizens of Islington wine bars were the key to Conservative election victories I was mentioning the 'West Virginiaisation' of UK politics and that Bassetlaw, Derbyshire NE, Don Valley, Penistone and Rother Valley were the route they should take.
Was 'West Virginiaisation' even a thing in 2007?
The incipient signs were already there - falling Labour turnout among working class voters, demographic change in the old mining areas, the socioeconomic effects of immigration.
Given that trends which happen in the USA often follow in this country it could be predicted and the local elections of 2008 and 2009 provided evidence that it was happening here.
I like the header, David, What big event will dominate the politics of the next decade ? Still Brexit ?
Climate change. Parties and governments that get caught on the wrong side of the issue will get wiped out.
But which is the wrong side? I feel that the term "environmentalist" has been corrupted somewhat, so that it has become to mean "anti-capitalist". The UK cannot, of course, solve the problem of the 1% rise in global temperatures over the last century by itself. If onerous regulations and costs are applied to UK subjects, thus disadvantaging the country versus others, this will not go down well with the electorate.
As a deep ecologist, like others I see the main issue as loss of bio-diversity which is linked to habitat loss due to homo sapien numbers. This is not being discussed because water-melon environmentalists keep banging on about climate change because it suits their anti-western virtue-signalling bias. Bizarrely - they see any discussion around human overpopulation as racist.
Extinction Rebellion is the best environmentalist group I have found so far. At least it puts loss of bio-diversity front and centre (in their title) and recognises that democracy will never solve the planet`s problem: that it is being destroyed by one rapacious species.
They also say nonsense such as “we have five years left”. They are a millenarian doomsday cult comprised of paid agitators, the mentally ill and those of feeble minds.
The way we will deal with this issue, as with others before, is through improvements in technology. Governments can ‘nudge’ things in the right direction, with tax breaks for R&D and incentives to invest in e.g. electric car infrastructure.
They certainly won’t get anywhere by pandering to a group of violent middle-class extremists who think Fred Flintstone had too much of a carbon footprint but who seem quite happy to take several flights a year themselves.
(I think the transatlantic flight count for Greta’s boat trip ended up at around a dozen, as various crews and supplies had to be moved around).
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
It’s probably been the best decade for humanity in the entire history of mankind.
No “probably” about that.
On almost any meaningful statistic (mortality, poverty, war, technology) the world’s population is far better off today than at any time in the past.
It’s something often overlooked in rich countries experiencing what’s seen as little more than stagnation.
That's down to the banks making more money each year, if you compare the values of money from a few decades ago, there's probably not much difference although we still have plenty of work to do.
More people in Northern Ireland have taken their own lives post "The Troubles" than people died in the troubles.
She didn’t get one when she left, having been told her contract would not be renewed. Rightly so. To reward her now for her second-rate period in charge is disgraceful.
Both Labour & the LibDems are fishing in the same pond for middle-class, educated voters in University & metropolitan seats.
There are ponds that are under-fished. Not ones particularly sympathetic to the LibDems, though.
Yep; so I find it hard to be optimistic about a near-term Lib Dem revival. (One could imagine an alternate history where Labour had kept firmly to a Leave policy and kept more of their northern seats while leaving the uni-and-metro areas more exposed to the Lib Dems, but that's not where we are.)
I'm curious to hear what your view of the under-fished ponds is. (My personal social circle is nearly 100% uni-and-metro so I'm pretty blind to other political currents...)
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
It’s probably been the best decade for humanity in the entire history of mankind.
No “probably” about that.
On almost any meaningful statistic (mortality, poverty, war, technology) the world’s population is far better off today than at any time in the past.
It’s something often overlooked in rich countries experiencing what’s seen as little more than stagnation.
That's down to the banks making more money each year, if you compare the values of money from a few decades ago, there's probably not much difference although we still have plenty of work to do.
More people in Northern Ireland have taken their own lives post "The Troubles" than people died in the troubles.
She didn’t get one when she left, having been told her contract would not be renewed. Rightly so. To reward her now for her second-rate period in charge is disgraceful.
Not disagreeing, just that I assume it's like being speaker- they might delay but wont prevent.
Not just any honour either, a Damehood. Thankfully, I think she’s the only really controversial one this new year, although the number of senior civil servants of all sorts given major honours for apparently just doing their jobs annoys me - IMO they should be reserved for significant achievements or successes.
Both Labour & the LibDems are fishing in the same pond for middle-class, educated voters in University & metropolitan seats.
There are ponds that are under-fished. Not ones particularly sympathetic to the LibDems, though.
Yep; so I find it hard to be optimistic about a near-term Lib Dem revival. (One could imagine an alternate history where Labour had kept firmly to a Leave policy and kept more of their northern seats while leaving the uni-and-metro areas more exposed to the Lib Dems, but that's not where we are.)
I'm curious to hear what your view of the under-fished ponds is. (My personal social circle is nearly 100% uni-and-metro so I'm pretty blind to other political currents...)
Workington Man probably appreciated having some bait cast on the water for a change. Mansfield Man has certainly appreciated it.
What can Labour now offer these places? It's schtick for decades of "we'll look out for you" has proven to be very thin gruel. Voters in these Unloved Places are looking around for a better offer. And that better offer is going to have to be proposed by Labour too. Red in tooth and claw socialism has been offered - and rejected. What next?
Honours should only be given for gallantry and voluntary work and no distinction should be made on the basis of your rank in society.
Agree entirely. No honours for the men who fought off the London Bridge terrorist but one for Nadia Hussein, for making cakes and having a lucrative Sunday Times article. For crying out loud!
Bloody hell, are we really rehashing the "only X percent of the population voted for this" argument?!
We won. Deal with it. Tories dealt with it for 13 years. It's up to your party to find a formula that works and how to get 44% people to vote for you like Blair did in 1997 or Boris just now.
It's not out fault that Labour has been taken over by the hard left, you let them in.
I don't recall Blair saying, "We won. Deal with it." Not very inclusive or likely to get the sceptical, but could be convinced, to your side
Firstly, the election is over. Second, I'm not trying to win any votes on here, were I speaking to the public it would be a different pitch entirely.
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
We are doing no better and no worse than other Countries AFAICS.
Well that’s absolutely no excuse. We should be challenging not hiding behind such fig leafs.
Get over yourself - focus your energy on those doing less than nothing. All the rest is pathetic virtue signalling.
No, it is not. The only significant effect we can have on “those doing less than nothing” is to lead by example. Hanging around bleating but they’re worse than us is doing less than nothing.
That is patently untrue. The only way we can have a 'significant effect' on countries that pump greenhouse gases into the air like it's going out of fashion is to place taxes/tariffs on imports from those countries. Will you tell China and India (and more importantly everyone who enjoys cheap Chinese and Indian products) or shall I?
'Leading by example' if taken to extremes is actually going to make the situation worse, if it further undermines domestic industries in favour of countries with lower environmental standards.
Another gong that shames the whole bloody system. Entirely agree with kjh.
I am not a well bear so working very much more slowly than usual.
We reward failure and second-rate crapness in this country. That might have been accurately said in 2010 and could probably be said again in 2030.
Grrr.........
I hope people are feeding this bear with lots of honey.
If Boris is really going to start shaking things up, he would have plenty of support if that extended to more "peoples" honours - and far fewer time-server gongs, regardless of quality.
Narwhal Bloke and Fire-extinguisher Guy are way more worthy of awards than any I've heard mentioned today.
Honours should only be given for gallantry and voluntary work and no distinction should be made on the basis of your rank in society.
Agree entirely. No honours for the men who fought off the London Bridge terrorist but one for Nadia Hussein, for making cakes and having a lucrative Sunday Times article. For crying out loud!
Would a gallantry award such as the George Medal or George Cross not be announced separately to the main honours?
And yes, anyone who dares to confront a terrorist directly should absolutely be honoured by the country.
Another gong that shames the whole bloody system. Entirely agree with kjh.
I am not a well bear so working very much more slowly than usual.
We reward failure and second-rate crapness in this country. That might have been accurately said in 2010 and could probably be said again in 2030.
Grrr.........
I hope people are feeding this bear with lots of honey.
If Boris is really going to start shaking things up, he would have plenty of support if that extended to more "peoples" honours - and far fewer time-server gongs, regardless of quality.
Narwhal Bloke and Fire-extinguisher Guy are way more worthy of awards than any I've heard mentioned today.
And as for a place in the Lords for Zac Goldsmith!!!!!!
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
We are doing no better and no worse than other Countries AFAICS.
Well that’s absolutely no excuse. We should be challenging not hiding behind such fig leafs.
Get over yourself - focus your energy on those doing less than nothing. All the rest is pathetic virtue signalling.
No, it is not. The only significant effect we can have on “those doing less than nothing” is to lead by example. Hanging around bleating but they’re worse than us is doing less than nothing.
That is patently untrue. The only way we can have a 'significant effect' on countries that pump greenhouse gases into the air like it's going out of fashion is to place taxes/tariffs on imports from those countries. Will you tell China and India (and more importantly everyone who enjoys cheap Chinese and Indian products) or shall I?
'Leading by example' if taken to extremes is actually going to make the situation worse, if it further undermines domestic industries in favour of countries with lower environmental standards.
Part and parcel of the same thing - and the EU, for example, is planning for carbon tariffs.
Honours should only be given for gallantry and voluntary work and no distinction should be made on the basis of your rank in society.
Agree entirely. No honours for the men who fought off the London Bridge terrorist but one for Nadia Hussein, for making cakes and having a lucrative Sunday Times article. For crying out loud!
Would a gallantry award such as the George Medal or George Cross not be announced separately to the main honours?
And yes, anyone who dares to confront a terrorist directly should absolutely be honoured by the country.
The shitty honours should have been dumped long ago , it is stuff like this , that makes the UK an absolute joke.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
Presumably we'd be in with a head start with the fantastic bonus of being part of the Union for 300+ years?
Well you would be if only you hadn’t let Margaret Thatcher in to spend all that oil revenue on her neoliberal project! 😉
A miserable decade, with next to no redeeming events. The U.K. peaked in 2012 with the Olympics. The failure to deal seriously with climate change will damn us. We chose nostalgia and nationalism instead.
We are doing no better and no worse than other Countries AFAICS.
Well that’s absolutely no excuse. We should be challenging not hiding behind such fig leafs.
Get over yourself - focus your energy on those doing less than nothing. All the rest is pathetic virtue signalling.
No, it is not. The only significant effect we can have on “those doing less than nothing” is to lead by example. Hanging around bleating but they’re worse than us is doing less than nothing.
That is patently untrue. The only way we can have a 'significant effect' on countries that pump greenhouse gases into the air like it's going out of fashion is to place taxes/tariffs on imports from those countries. Will you tell China and India (and more importantly everyone who enjoys cheap Chinese and Indian products) or shall I?
'Leading by example' if taken to extremes is actually going to make the situation worse, if it further undermines domestic industries in favour of countries with lower environmental standards.
"Behind every great fortune is a crime forgotten" is pretty applicable to Western consumerism and the sweatshops and child labour it seems to rely on
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
How very Brexit.
There is a lot of mental gymnastics required to support Brexit and deny Scottish independence (and vice versa).
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
I don't see us avoiding another Scottish referendum for the next decade, sadly. I am confident that it will have the same result as the last one and hopefully be less close. In the more immediate future I will be astonished if Nicola is still first Minister at the end of this coming year.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
...
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
Scotland chose to stay as a member of the United Kingdom. Not centuries ago. In 2014.
The people of the UK - your recently-endorsed UK - collectively chose to Brexit. Where is the insult?
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
...
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
Scotland voted YES.
Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
There is a lot of mental gymnastics required to support Brexit and deny Scottish independence (and vice versa).
Not if you stick with the first principle that the people who live in a country should decide on its future. I've not met many indy supporters who believe (regrettable as it is) that England should be forcibly prevented from satiating its Brexit instincts, some English Brexiteers (including the bunch of lightweights and idealogues that are apparently the UK government) otoh...
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
...
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
Scotland voted YES.
You are forgetting @Jonathan that ‘my’ side is the whole nation/people, the others are… not to be considered.
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
I’d like Scotland to stay part of the UK because I fear for England & Wales without you but I agree that an independent Scotland would do just fine economically.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
How very Brexit.
There is a lot of mental gymnastics required to support Brexit and deny Scottish independence (and vice versa).
That one considers themselves British, and wishes to be part of the United Kingdom?
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
...
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
Scotland voted YES.
Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
Hmmm. Blaming others won’t get you nearer your goal. The Scots I know are not fools and can see through politicians promises. I think you have to deal with the fundamental issue, which is that many Scots like to be part of the UK.
Both Labour & the LibDems are fishing in the same pond for middle-class, educated voters in University & metropolitan seats.
There are ponds that are under-fished. Not ones particularly sympathetic to the LibDems, though.
Yep; so I find it hard to be optimistic about a near-term Lib Dem revival. (One could imagine an alternate history where Labour had kept firmly to a Leave policy and kept more of their northern seats while leaving the uni-and-metro areas more exposed to the Lib Dems, but that's not where we are.)
I'm curious to hear what your view of the under-fished ponds is. (My personal social circle is nearly 100% uni-and-metro so I'm pretty blind to other political currents...)
I agree that Labour/LibDems could have thwarted the Tories in GE 2019 if Labour had remained steady after the Euro elections. The shock of the Euros caused Labour to tack to Remain to protect themselves against the LibDems. So, there were two parties competing for the same educated, metropolitan vote.
I don't think the LibDems can ever win against Labour, if they fish in this pond. They killed themselves with this constituency over University tuition fees. The metropolitan, University vote that is **young** is overwhelmingly Labour. I expect Labour to continue to pander to this vote at the expense of the less educated voters in e.g., South Wales or the North East. So, I conclude that the LibDems are doomed at the moment. There is hardly any useful function for them. They are the political equivalent of an appendix. It is made glaring for me by people (like our genial host) who chatter about LibDem-mery, and rail about never voting for an anti-Semite, but in election after election end up voting "tactically" for Labour.
The constituency that is largely unrepresented is of course the losers from globalisation. Our economic model creates enormous wealth, but it is concentrated in a viciously unequal way, skewed towards a highly educated and mobile and metropolitan overclass. The latter show no glimmer of understanding, as they sit under their fig trees eating cheese.
We are heading towards the kind of societies depicted in HG Wells, with a barbarous underclass and a gilded, ineffectual elite, the Morlocks and the Eloi.
Of course, the Morlocks eat the Eloi in the Time Machine.
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
...
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
Scotland voted YES.
Based on it being only way to stay in the EU and on a shedload of promises, all BROKEN, usual lies and cheating the mugs get every time.
So, you appear to be stating that if you leave the UK you leave the EU.
I have not been able to find any predictions back as far as 2010.
[... Other interesting predictions, some of which I share ...]
If there's another referendum, I am confident independence will win. There isn't a consensus for the Union anymore and the British, not Scottish, crowd only make up a 25% hardcore, not enough to win a50% vote.
As a somewhat convicted unionist, I wonder if our energies are better spent trying to make a success of independence rather than arguing about process. Brexit is an example to avoid I think. Not only is it a bad idea from my point of view, but Leavers/Tories are going about it in the most cackhanded, divisive and destructive way possible. Can't we do better than that?
I have always said that the SNP have gone about this the wrong way around. First you build a viable economy then you go for independence. Our economy has become considerably less viable since 2014 and the trends are not good. Even as a Unionist I take no pleasure in that whatsoever and wish it were not so but independence now is a vote for considerable hardship.
David, how do you build anything when the vast majority of your budget is determined by and controlled by Westminster. The SNP have virtually no powers to alter the economy, all tax powers ( apart from teh joke income tax ) are held by Westminster. They have proven they have no intention of improving Scotland's lot and only way we ever get better is to raise our own taxes and spend it on what we want , not what London wants.
...
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
I agree - Though there would be sacrifices, it is by no means not viable. I have never subscribed to Project Fear. My objection is that it would be a tragically unnecessary and wasteful process based on the weaponisation of people's most negative instincts.
You can only treat people like crap for so long , even the weakest will get a backbone at some point. Completely shutting Scotland out of Brexit etc and taking back the powers was the final insult, we are not dogs to be ordered about.
Scotland voted YES.
You are forgetting @Jonathan that ‘my’ side is the whole nation/people, the others are… not to be considered.
Unionists are scared to ask the people, that is the issue, they prefer to deny democracy, not for themselves but for others. If you are so confident why not have the vote and kill it, methinks I know why.
Comments
I look forward to your predictions for 2020 - surely easier for this coming decade now:
Shift to PR and parties would fracture, leading to a far greater number of smaller parties, far more subjugated to the whims of activists (and that worked so well when it happened to Labour). The electorate would then vote, after which the political class would barter with one another, negotiating which one(s) would form the government.
The electorate would have no say in that discussion. Parties would be free (and perhaps even compelled) to jettison the policies which had earnt them the votes in the first place. That's less democratic, rather than more.
And if you have four parties on 30%, 25%, 25%, and 20% there's no guarantee at all the most popular party would even be in government.
FPTP has its flaws, but they aren't nearly so numerous as those of PR.
However the debacle of the last three years has convinced me that there is an argument in strong government and winner takes all in FPTP.
We've seen what it looks like when governments fail to achieve a majority, when parliament is deadlocked, when a small number of extremist MPs can hold a government to ransom, when junior coalition partners are able to demand huge amounts from the government.
And it hasn't been pretty. Do we really want an eternity of fractious coalitions and in-fighting? One of the worst things about Brexit is that it appears the business of government outside of Brexit has completely stopped.
And the kicker, if one was needed, is that PR would have delivered us a Con/Farage coalition, which would have arguably been more extreme and more divisive. In a world where people are tacking to the extremes, I'm not comfortable with a system that potentially puts extremists in power. Imagine if 10% of the population voted for Anne Marie Waters or the BNP...
The brexit debacle has made me change my mind a lot on PR. I'm not sure what I system I support yet, but it's given me pause for thought.
We won. Deal with it. Tories dealt with it for 13 years. It's up to your party to find a formula that works and how to get 44% people to vote for you like Blair did in 1997 or Boris just now.
It's not out fault that Labour has been taken over by the hard left, you let them in.
Do countries become more like China, where the writings of George Orwell are treated as instruction manuals? If governments don’t track you constantly themselves, can they do anything about the massive private invasions of privacy and unaccountability that are Facebook and Google? Can fake news be eliminated while keeping freedom of speech? Will fake videos lead to even more distrust of content? Will media be able to get back towards actually practicing journalism, rather than simply chasing clickbait headlines? Will political opponents be able to engage with each other, instead of talking exclusively within their own digital echo-chambers? Can governments even keep up with the speed at which technology progresses?
I suspect that the flash points for most of the above are going to be the US elections in 2020 and 2024. Most of the issues identified are bigger problems in that country than elsewhere.
It was 57% of the election that didn't vote for him
The next Welsh Senedd elections in 2021 may prove to be the most difficult yet for Labour.
1. They have been in power continuously since 1999, over two decades. This is plenty of time to have actually started to fix some of the problems Wales has. In fact, it would be hard to point to any definite & real achievements over the 20 years. They have presided over decay in education & health & the economy.
2.They have an unpopular leader in Mark Drakeford.
3.Their Westminster majorities -- even in the Valleys seats -- are now sharply down. The trend has been against Labour, albeit slowly, for decades now. These South Walian seats are nearing tipping point.
4. Welsh voters have been much more inclined to vote against Labour for Assembly elections than Westminster.
5 And finally boundary changes for Westminster are likely to lead to some disgruntled Labour MPs who will lose out, and end up eager to rock the boat.
Against that, Labour may have chosen wisely for their Westminster leader & may receive a polling bounce -- but then again, they may not & may be engaged in internecine bloodletting.
The most popular candidate in each constituency is chose as the representative of that constituency
You think there should be a national electorate. I argue that regions are different
The most popular candidate in each constituency is chose as the representative of that constituency
You think there should be a national electorate. I argue that regions are different
In terms of C02 reductions we are some considerable way ahead of any other major European economy - the last time I checked the data.
In absolute terms France may be lower but that is because of their nuclear sector.
I think an important priority is to face down a movement of Greenies which does not really engage reason, but just focuses on taking up the most extreme position of anyone, and squawking like parakeets. to make us all obey the latest demand.
Some of the interviews broadcast during the Extinction Rebellion pillock parade were hugely enlightening - they really do seem to be (on the whole) gullibles or thickies.
Why would it not do as well as similarly sized, located and resourced countries like Ireland, Norway and Denmark?
There are opinions and they differ. There are facts and they don't and there is logic which can be applied to both facts and opinions. If applied to facts the deductions are also facts. If applied to opinions the result is still an opinion, but correct if the original opinion is assumed to be correct.
Nigel's post was a logical deduction from your post.
As someone whose degree was studying logic it is a pleasure to post to a site where most arguments are logical, but it is frustrating when one sees illogical posts. HYFUD is the worst example. He can't distinguish between fact and opinion and is incapable of a logical argument. Frustratingly this is true even when he is right!!!
The only way to guarantee your vote isn't for a winner is not to vote.
The problem with PR is that once you've given your vote it doesn't determine the government, it determines how the parties negotiate and throw away some of their policies whilst accepting those of other parties. And if you voted for X because you think their education policy is great and they jettison it, you can't do anything about that. You can't even be mad about it because the whole system is designed to hack every manifesto to pieces and make the programme of government a Frankenstein's monster.
There are ponds that are under-fished. Not ones particularly sympathetic to the LibDems, though.
Labour tossing out the referendum promise, for example, didn't necessarily work out to their advantage.
On almost any meaningful statistic (mortality, poverty, war, technology) the world’s population is far better off today than at any time in the past.
It’s something often overlooked in rich countries experiencing what’s seen as little more than stagnation.
Of course, it is now richer than both Sweden and Denmark.
Given that trends which happen in the USA often follow in this country it could be predicted and the local elections of 2008 and 2009 provided evidence that it was happening here.
#totallyaseriousprediction
They certainly won’t get anywhere by pandering to a group of violent middle-class extremists who think Fred Flintstone had too much of a carbon footprint but who seem quite happy to take several flights a year themselves.
(I think the transatlantic flight count for Greta’s boat trip ended up at around a dozen, as various crews and supplies had to be moved around).
More people in Northern Ireland have taken their own lives post "The Troubles" than people died in the troubles.
Honours should only be given for gallantry and voluntary work and no distinction should be made on the basis of your rank in society.
I'm curious to hear what your view of the under-fished ponds is. (My personal social circle is nearly 100% uni-and-metro so I'm pretty blind to other political currents...)
Another gong that shames the whole bloody system. Entirely agree with kjh.
The global picture is not the Western picture.
https://twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/852813032723857409?s=20
Not just any honour either, a Damehood.
Thankfully, I think she’s the only really controversial one this new year, although the number of senior civil servants of all sorts given major honours for apparently just doing their jobs annoys me - IMO they should be reserved for significant achievements or successes.
What can Labour now offer these places? It's schtick for decades of "we'll look out for you" has proven to be very thin gruel. Voters in these Unloved Places are looking around for a better offer. And that better offer is going to have to be proposed by Labour too. Red in tooth and claw socialism has been offered - and rejected. What next?
We reward failure and second-rate crapness in this country. That might have been accurately said in 2010 and could probably be said again in 2030.
Grrr.........
Agree entirely. No honours for the men who fought off the London Bridge terrorist but one for Nadia Hussein, for making cakes and having a lucrative Sunday Times article. For crying out loud!
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/855178/New-Year-Honours-2020.pdf
'Leading by example' if taken to extremes is actually going to make the situation worse, if it further undermines domestic industries in favour of countries with lower environmental standards.
If Boris is really going to start shaking things up, he would have plenty of support if that extended to more "peoples" honours - and far fewer time-server gongs, regardless of quality.
Narwhal Bloke and Fire-extinguisher Guy are way more worthy of awards than any I've heard mentioned today.
And yes, anyone who dares to confront a terrorist directly should absolutely be honoured by the country.
I wish you a speedy recovery.
(I have avoided the flu, but have a stinking cold, which is doing little for my good humour.)
The people of the UK - your recently-endorsed UK - collectively chose to Brexit. Where is the insult?
SNP = pick'n'mix democracy.....
https://twitter.com/UK_Together/status/506899714923843584?s=20
I don't think the LibDems can ever win against Labour, if they fish in this pond. They killed themselves with this constituency over University tuition fees. The metropolitan, University vote that is **young** is overwhelmingly Labour. I expect Labour to continue to pander to this vote at the expense of the less educated voters in e.g., South Wales or the North East. So, I conclude that the LibDems are doomed at the moment. There is hardly any useful function for them. They are the political equivalent of an appendix. It is made glaring for me by people (like our genial host) who chatter about LibDem-mery, and rail about never voting for an anti-Semite, but in election after election end up voting "tactically" for Labour.
The constituency that is largely unrepresented is of course the losers from globalisation. Our economic model creates enormous wealth, but it is concentrated in a viciously unequal way, skewed towards a highly educated and mobile and metropolitan overclass. The latter show no glimmer of understanding, as they sit under their fig trees eating cheese.
We are heading towards the kind of societies depicted in HG Wells, with a barbarous underclass and a gilded, ineffectual elite, the Morlocks and the Eloi.
Of course, the Morlocks eat the Eloi in the Time Machine.
You had better play nice with Spain then....
If you are so confident why not have the vote and kill it, methinks I know why.