Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

General British politics discussion thread

Options
1316317319321322465

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,715 ✭✭✭PommieBast




  • Registered Users Posts: 26,414 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Here's a thing:

    1. Historically, the bookies' odds have been a better predictor of election outcomes than the opinion polls.
    2. Right now, the bookies have Labour at 2/1 on for an overall majority at the next election. (Conservative majority: 8/1 against; hung parliament: 9/4 against.)

    To win on English/Welsh seats, Labour needs a 13.8% swing nationally. Right now, per the polls, they are sitting on a 19% swing. They have been for many months. It's not clear what the Tories can do to shift this; it's not as though they haven't been trying.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,715 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Went looking to see if there has ever been a GE swing that big and the only one was 1931 where both the Labour and Liberal parties split. Election could be as much as 18 months away so plenty of time for polls to tighten.

    I think the Conservatives are now just shoring up their base to avoid James Goldsmith style spoiler candidates. As for Labour I just don't sense the enthusiasm needed for them to sweep the board.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,939 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    I think you are making the mistake of thinking Labour are +19% nationally, labour are only +6/7% and the tories are down 16/17% with the lib dems and greens picking up the leftovers. So yes the difference is 19% but in reality labour are still polling less than a majority of voters at around 47 percent which would just be an increase of 7% on their 2019 result if it held which isnt that much of a swing towards them and is more just a crumbling of tory support.

    I still think its absurd that a party can win an overwhelming majority with less than a majority of voters.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,520 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    47% of the electoral share in the UK system is an absolutely stonking result. Labour in 97 only won 43% of the vote. The 2019 election was highly unusually concentrated in the two main parties.

    Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if its only a marginal Labour gain with a Tory collapse. The end result is going to end up much the same.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,715 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    I really don't see the Conservatives losing more than a quarter of their support (i.e -11%); and of that drop I doubt it'll be Labour hoovering it all up. On those numbers Labour can only get a majority if they also grab a lot of SNP seats.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,520 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Labour don't need to hoover up the Tory vote, such is the nature of the UK electoral system. And dropping 11% would be 31% which they haven't been averaging in polls since the start of Truss' term and that is coming up to a year ago now.

    But even if they do get back to 31% and Labour drop off from their current numbers we are still looking at something quite similar to the 1997 results, which didn't remotely need Scottish seats for a majority.

    Thinks will obviously change between now and the election proper, but this is not a momentary drop. The current situation has been the status quo for almost a year now and nothing suggests the Tories are capable to getting out of this malaise. They are having historic byelection turnarounds.



  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    FPTP exaggerates swings. In 2015 two parties got 20.5% of the vote between them and got 9 MPs. The DUP got 8 MP's on 1.2% of the vote.


    In 2015 the % vote and the Votes per elected MP for the English/Wales parties were

    36.80% 34,241 Tories

    30.40% 40,290 Labour

    7.90% 301,990 Lib Dems

    12.60% 3,881,099 UKIP


    If the other parties could translate votes to seats as efficiently as the party on the highest % then

    Labour would have gotten 41 extra seats , LibDems 71 and UKIP 112



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,414 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Yup. Labour are absolutely cruising to victory at the next election with a single-party majority, and the behaviour of the Tories makes it very clear that they fully accept this and do not see it changing. Not only are the polls and the bookies' odds pointing very strongly in this direction, but there's also this consideration; if the Tories were to be returned to office at the next election, that would be for the fifth election in a row. No UK political party of any stripe has ever achieved this. Does the delusional, psychopathic rabble that currently constitutes the Tory party look like an outfit that could win this historic accolade from a country that is plainly sick and tired of them?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,715 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    @Podge_irl - Lets just agree to disagree on this point. I need to get hold of some CSV data of 2019 I can run thru a Python script before explaining in numbers my thoughts.

    @Peregrinus - I grew up in a Conservative area and recently went to an old school reunion where I am certain they inject blue dye into their bloodstream, and even though a lot of them are disgusted about what the current administration has done, hell will freeze over before they vote Labour. Friends of mine who regretted voting Con've in 2019 look like they'll mostly not vote next time round.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 26,414 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Obviously there'll still be many people who will vote Conservative no matter what - there always will. But with the quaintly crapulous UK electoral system, "many people" isn't enough to prevent an electoral bloodbath - The Tories got 30.8% in 1997, well ahead of where they are now, but they lost more than half their seats.

    And, as for your friends who voted Tory, now regret it, and likely won't vote next time — Labour will be happy with that. One vote less for the Tories is one vote less that they have to win.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,443 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I'm taking this as confirmation that Sunak will be running on what is essentially culture war trolling. Here, he's asked how he will be travelling to Scotland and his response is to twist the question into a suggestion that the interviewer is proposing the cancelling of any and all holidays.

    He came in promising professionalism but the fact that he has achieved nothing has clearly convinced him that going full Trump is the way forward. I initially thought he'd have been decent enough at the PR stuff but he can't even do that anymore.

    It's a far cry from this, that's for sure.

    Johnson had a degree of charisma and Cummings, Sunak has nothing.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,477 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    What's weird about Sunak is that he probably doesn't even agree with the culture war / racist stuff but has probably been advised it's the way to go.

    The net result though is that it is taking GB into a very dark place.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,443 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I think he does. I think he's fully on board with it. He's a lot more right wing than people think. Covid has left some sort of statist tint to him and most people still think he's some sort of closet lefty. He was called a remainer when debating Liz Truss last year even.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,820 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Is John major the last good conservative leader ? Paddy Ashdown called him “a thoroughly decent man leading an awful party” which I’d take a compliment.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,443 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I would say so. Thatcherism seems to have resulted in the parliamentary party being flooded with materialistically-minded careerists.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,332 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Yes, JM was a good politician and PM. Sadly no one of that stature eg Rory Stewart, is still in the Tory party.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,477 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    He was from a working class background and didn't even attend university - a complete world away from the millionaire toffs in the party and in the right wing press.



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,332 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Far from a grey politician, knew of his fling with Edwina Curry. so just looked at his Wiki page. Got his start from a older divorcee Jean Kearns who lived across the road, and also became his lover. He was 20, she was 33 with two children. Good on you boyo.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,715 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    The best bit was around the same time Spitting Image fabricating an affair with Virginia Bottomley in order to make him appear less grey..



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,580 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    100%. I get the vibe from him that anyone that isn't as successful as him is simply down to their own fault. Empathy is for losers. Comes across, to me, as one of those 80's Wall Street types. Believe that they are right about everything and when others don't agree its because they simply aren't smart enough to get it.

    He is completely in hock to big business. Everything he does is to the benefit of the top guys. But, he is also really bad at being a politician. He is poor at interviews, gets stuck on a loop. Remember his first address after becoming PM. So awkward. And he is not getting any better. He is really poor at PMQ's, only the partisan backing of his party saves him from complete humiliation.

    He has achieved next ti nothing as PM. He didn't even need to do much, just not be as bad as Truss or lie as openly as Johnson and yet he appears to be running them both pretty close. His wife's non-dom status, and his initial refusal to even accept it as an issue, was the warning sign.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,630 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    He got to be Chancellor because he was happy enough to agree to let Cummins have control which is why his predecessor was stepped down.

    I think it's also a big warning sign and points to a man who cares about the title not the job.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,715 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    Something I came across in another thread:

    No idea if source is at all reliable but stuff like this if true is of absolutely no surprise..



  • Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Unflushable Turd


    I left BP over ten years ago and we were doing around $350m a year with Infosys then.

    trying to link this to the awarding of new North Sea licences seems to be pretty tenuous at best.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,154 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo




  • Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Unflushable Turd


    It would be if he was part of the decision making process in to who got those licences. But that process will presumably be handled by the OGA and will be transparent.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,687 ✭✭✭serfboard


    Post referring to comments made by Lee Anderson, deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party and MP for Ashfield in Nottinghamshire. A thoroughly dislikable individual, he represents a constituency that voted 70% in favour of Brexit and where, in the 2010 General Election, the BNP got 6% of the vote.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,078 ✭✭✭salonfire


    I see that the NHS strikes are set to continue with Junior Doctors.

    Why do they expect to be benchmarked back to 2010 in their pay claims?

    If we are to believe that people and the UK are worse off today after Brexit, why do they believe they should be shielded from that? Is it only for other people to suffer the consequences of reduced economic activity and not them?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,477 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    The effects this is having on public discourse in GB is horrendous. The amount of out and out racists you see on Twitter - genuine National Front types - repeating word for word what the Tory Party, GB News and the Daily Mail have told them about "illegal migrants" is shocking. Anderson is only saying what they are all thinking.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,580 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    The government, those that decide on the pay, have continually stated that Brexit is great and will result in major benefits. So why should the junior doctors not get to enjoy the windfall?



Advertisement