Categories
Some of the seats LAB needs to win for a Commons majority – politicalbetting.com
Some of the seats LAB needs to win for a Commons majority – politicalbetting.com
By my reckoning Starmer’s LAB needs to gain in excess of 123 seats at the next election in order to secure a majority. The table from above from the excellent Election Polling site lists some of the seats that the party taking in order to achieve power.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
EDIT: Yes, first. Hooray!
So Lab need to gain Macclesfield to form a majority. That is an astonishingly long way away.
Fascinating to see how the electoral geography has changed though, that Bournemouth West and Macclesfield are now in the same bracket of 'pretty safe Con' as Morley and Outwood and Great Grimsby.
The All Whites nickname used by New Zealand’s national football team could be ditched as part of a review New Zealand Football has launched into cultural diversity.
“As with many other national bodies, New Zealand Football is on a journey around cultural inclusivity and respecting the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi,” NZF said in a statement, referring to the treaty between the British crown and Māori chiefs signed in 1840.
It's political correctness gone mad.
The last bit of the thread header that states.. "but we were saying that at GE 2017" is superflous.
Anti Vax Passport Protesters take over the Daily Mail Offices in London https://t.co/lWr6w3qJSN
Dunfermline and West Fife
West Dunbartonshire
Even if the parties gain and lose *some* of the seats they newly gained and lost last time, the mould has been broken, and I think it is very difficult to predict exactly what is going to happen in 2024, based on "results since 1992".
However black swans and zeitgeist shifts happen. What might it take? Pick any three + an unknowable joker and you might be there:
a) Boris to become a loser over something like Afghanistan (UK deaths because we left our people stuck there?) but cling on or be replaced by a second rater.
b) Labour to acquire a charismatic popular and populist leader
c) Inflation
d) Brexit to become an albatross
e) Tory scandals
f) Tory splits from the 'One Nation' centre
g) Tories lose the media support they need
h) SNP implodes
i) A new and unpopular war which we lose
j) NHS
k) Migration/asylum
l) "Time for a change"
Personally, I think good bellwethers might be
Wakefield (target 38) - needed to deprive Boris of his majority - a swingback in the Red wall.
Milton Keynes (target ~60) - needed for Lab largest party - soft left remain territory
Nuneaton (target 169) - famously competitive in 2010 - not strictly required for Lab majority, but it has to be in play for that to be a possibility.
Not good news for the Unionists in Scotland.
1. Makes tactical voting much harder
2. The SNP vote is very evenly spread, so to a large extent it doesn’t really matter how the boundaries are drawn. In contrast SCon, SLab and SLD all have great areas and dire areas, so statistically there is a high probability that a “black hole” is brought into the “wrong” constituency.
(*very hard to see happening on his current form)
I wonder if he has more insight than they do. Clue: winning SNP seats doesnt' do anything to reduce the Conservative majority./
And then factor in that SCon, SLab and SLD might have their own understandings of which seats are “theirs” (cf East Lothian in May).
https://www.thenational.scot/news/15236862.ian-murray-backs-tactical-voting-for-tories-to-keep-snp-out/
Anas only lost two seats. Richard “Hammer of the Scots” Leonard would have lost at least ten.
Dodds is a worry for SLab. A loose cannon. She has no mandate in Scotland, but like Gove thinks she has a god-given right to tell the branch office what to do.
I would add that voting tactically does tend to require a certain amount of political sophistication and awareness to begin with.
Pfizer-BioNTech 135m
Oxford Astra-Zeneca 100m
Valneva 100m
GlaxoSmithKline/Sanofi Pasteur 60m
Novavax 60m
CureVac 50m
Janssen 20m
Moderna 17m
New boundaries will be a Unionist triumph. You heard it here first.
And I have laid a Tory majority.
I think the result in 2024 will fall somewhere between 2010 but in reverse and 2015 repeated. We have reached peak Tory and it is downhill from here, IMHO
... goes off to check calendar ...
B nope
C racing certainty
D racing certainty
E racing certainty
F already happened
G unlikely
H unlikely
I nope, that was more a Blair thing
J tricky one; hard to call
K unlikely (Labour are never going to out-Tory the Tories in that issue)
L likely
Jeepers! I’m off down the bookies!
That would mean UK voteshares of something like Labour 42% and the Tories 33% ie back to 1997 or 2001 at minimum and that is assuming Labour can win back some seats from the SNP, if not then they would need to win even more.
So at most Labour is likely to be able to force a hung parliament realistically and rely on SNP and LD support
You should stop listening to ill educated school kids for getting your climate news.
I recall when the "racing certainty" of Brexit being an "albatross" was that it would cause mass unemployment.
Now the biggest thing Scott and the FBPE crowd have to complain about is that the economy is going so well that everyone, even prisoners, is employable.
58 of them will be Annie Hackers making their way to their offices, utterly unprepared for Government!
Tall Blacks is one of the best sports nicknames.
Much like Labour, I think it would benefit the entire population long term to have Boris Johnson and this lot of Tories out. Then they can go back to being sensible again.
/pedant
So basically, to get 100+ seats to fall, based on recent history, we need:
1. A govt led by someone as unpopular as John Major or Gordon Brown, both of whom suffered major economic reverses & lost all semblance of economic competence by the election.
2. An opposition led by someone as popular as Tony Blair or David Cameron.
My guess is that neither of these will be true in 2024.
1. The Tories have somehow reset the clock in 2019, and so Boris's Tories have not yet built up the burden of unpopularity of a long-lived Government.
2. SKS is not as photogenic as Blair circa 1997, or Cameron circa 2010. (Of course, both turned out to be pretty despicable characters and SKS may well be a much worthier person).
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1429806547471851522?s=19
What evidence do you have that its not demand limited? Demand for rail freight nationwide has collapsed in recent years due to the collapse in coal-rail which has seen rail freight collapse from over 30 million tonnes to 19 million tonnes. What evidence is there for unmet demand here?
Besides what sort of increase in capacity are we talking about if we build HS2 for over £100bn? Are we talking millions of tonnes? Tens of millions?
Meanwhile the road network transports billions of tonnes of freight. Not a few million.
Rail is like the Fishing industry. Its obsessed over because people like the idea of it, more than the economics of it. That and the almost religious dislike of cars and HGVs.
Especially for people who are self-employed, or employed by a friend/relative etc then an arrangement to work while the government picks up most of the tab, is I imagine far from unheard of.
I highly doubt when furlough ends that all those still on furlough will suddenly end up unemployed.
At this point in time there does need to be an acceptance that some industries are going to face a tough road back and will need to rationalise positions. Better to get on with that now while the rest of the economy is so hot and people can find jobs easily. I wouldn't want to be a tour guide for a museum waiting to be called back and then being made redundant in September along with everyone else.
Besides I was under the impression that there's nothing preventing your hypothetical tour guide from looking for work and taking another job today even if they're currently on furlough, is there?
Indeed only in 1945 and 1997 has a party lost 100 seats or more at a general election since WW2
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/22/uk-scientists-look-at-halving-boosters-to-save-vaccine-for-rest-of-the-world?__twitter_impression=true
We can gain some idea of the effect of boundary changes by looking at Wales.
In the list down to Ceredigion (which Labour has not held for 60 years), there are 14 Welsh target seats.
Labour already hold 22 Welsh seats. So, this make 22 + 14 = 36 Welsh seats.
There will only be 32 Welsh seats after the boundary review
And Labour will not take all the re-drawn Welsh seats (for sure, not the NW Welsh-speaking seats and not the rural mid-Walian seats, some of which Labour have never held).
Labour will do very, very well to take 26/32 in Wales.
So, even in the most propitious circs, they will need another ~ 10 English or Scottish seats to make up for this.
I was genuinely trying to be helpful
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9919075/Up-200-anti-vaxxers-storm-ITNs-London-HQ.html#comments
Bearing in mind the road network moves billions of tonnes and the entire rail network combined currently moves 19 million. Yet because of the anti-car and anti-HGV dogma we aren't investing anything like the trillions into the road network that pro-rata would justify £100bn for rail.
We've seen that with the opposition to cuts in the extremely unpopular and unnecessary foreign aid budget.
Never did anything about it, of course, as I work from home anyway.
Free money is free money for so many people.
https://twitter.com/NewsForAllUK/status/1429816176775999494
On Topic- the SNP have got so many Scottish seats that it would take a miracle for Labour to get a majority. It's one of those things that nobody will admit, but that has to be part of the calculation of what happens next.
And it would be interesting to know where the Clarke-Stewart Conservatives have gone. Labour? Lib Dem? Very reluctantly voting Conservative? Staying at home? Some of them have clearly gone somewhere, since the Conservatives have assimilated the old Brexit Party vote and are still slightly down overall.
Hence all seats are up for grabs. It's down to the policies of the parties.
Not confident than R & W will be anything other than a comfortable Tory lead.
The "teeny tiny" thing is only where the investment is teeny tiny. Our small number of small light rail systems carry just under 270m journeys a year, 150m if we ignore DLR. That is only Manchester / Nottingham / Tyne and Wear / Croydon-Beckenham / Midland Metro / Blackpool.
Checking Nottingham, the trams do 60 journeys per year per resident in the region, and the system does not even cover the whole city. Not teeny-tiny.
Tesla etc have made some progress on emissions, though it depends on supply mix, and they are strangely reticent about their own environmental credentials, unless it has changed recently. The elephant in the room is congestion.
On the £100bn on roads - some investment, yes. The one that gets my goat is greenies demanding that places where road accidents put cars in gardens or front rooms get no investment on a universal principle.
A few more or bigger roads as a complete alternative to a proper rail network? That's for the birds imo.
BICS includes almost all sectors with staff shortages, including hospitality and road haulage.
We know that ~1m are on furlough in these industries.
Based on the weightings, around 35% of these are in those two industry sectors (*this includes the arts but we're ballparking this), i.e. 350,000.
Of those, only 40% or 140,000 were fully furloughed and the rest were in partial furlough.
That's still a pretty chunky number, but I expect (another) big fall later this week.
The real problem for HMG is if this goes seriously wrong, and we have to leave behind those who qualify to leave
And as far as polls are concerned a labour lead would not surprise me, but I have said for months the 2024 GE is unpredictable but of course labour are not likely to capture many Scottish seats