Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 20, 2017, 07:48:13 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  International Elections (Moderator: Hash)
| | |-+  UK General Election, June 8th 2017
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 85 Print
Author Topic: UK General Election, June 8th 2017  (Read 80809 times)
IceAgeComing
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 815
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #325 on: April 21, 2017, 12:54:44 pm »
Ignore

Looking forward to cheering on this man again!



Willie's on the sidelines for this one
Logged
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1878
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #326 on: April 21, 2017, 01:15:31 pm »
Ignore

Constituencies won by the Tories in 2015 which voted more than 55% Remain according to the Hanretty estimates.  Those Lib Dem in 2010 are in orange.  A handful of others have recent Lib Dem history (Richmond Park, Oxford West & Abingdon, Winchester, Guildford, arguably York Outer which was supposedly notionally Lib Dem when created).  Any other plausible Lib Dem targets in the list?

over 70% Remain:

Battersea
Putney
Richmond Park (lost in by-election)
Cities of London & Westminster
Chelsea & Fulham

65% to 70% Remain:

Finchley & Golders Green
Kensington
Bath
Twickenham

60% to 65% Remain:

Enfield Southgate
St Albans
Oxford West & Abingdon
Reading East
South Cambridgeshire
Altrincham & Sale West
Cardiff North
Hitchin & Harpenden
Winchester

55% to 60% Remain:

South West Surrey
Bristol North West
Chipping Barnet
Warwick & Leamington
Guildford
Rushcliffe
Kingston & Surbiton
Esher & Walton
Cheadle
Hendon
Wokingham
Cheltenham
Henley
Brighton Kemptown
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale
Woking
Tunbridge Wells (!)
York Outer
South East Cambridgeshire
Logged

Anybody But Conservative
Trounce-'em Theresa
Nathan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19678


View Profile
« Reply #327 on: April 21, 2017, 01:34:05 pm »
Ignore

It seems that there are two parallel LAB campaigns.  Corbyn will tour districts the party needs to win to gain a majority in Parliament, while party’s headquarter,who control party funds and Corbyn as a liability, plan the defense of seats with majorities of 5K votes or more, conceding LAB seats with majorities of 5K or less as lost.

WTF. If they're conceding seats with narrow majorities as lost, then how in the world do they expect to pick up enough seats to gain a majority?!
Logged



Professor Nathan. A shameless agrarian collectivist with no respect for private property or individual rights. Can you really trust him?

Yeah that's right, I said Siam. Why don't you go tell Pedro Martinez
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 61421
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #328 on: April 21, 2017, 01:43:37 pm »
Ignore

Because there's no prospect of winning a majority. But don't believe everything you read about campaign strategies (certainly such calculations would not be based on raw majorities - because that varies based on turnout and the size of constituencies - but percentage ones) or, frankly, most rumours repeated by journalists at all.
Logged



Trounce-'em Theresa
Nathan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 19678


View Profile
« Reply #329 on: April 21, 2017, 01:46:43 pm »
Ignore

Because there's no prospect of winning a majority.

The implication of the rumor is that Corbyn thinks there is.

Quote
But don't believe everything you read about campaign strategies (certainly such calculations would not be based on raw majorities - because that varies based on turnout and the size of constituencies - but percentage ones) or, frankly, most rumours repeated by journalists at all.

Point taken.
Logged



Professor Nathan. A shameless agrarian collectivist with no respect for private property or individual rights. Can you really trust him?

Yeah that's right, I said Siam. Why don't you go tell Pedro Martinez
IceAgeComing
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 815
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #330 on: April 21, 2017, 01:54:14 pm »
Ignore

in order for Labour to get a majority of 1 they'd need a uniform swing around the levels that Blair got in 1997

I think it's fair to say that using Scotland ended up bad for Labour
Logged
tack50
Full Member
***
Posts: 210
Spain


View Profile
« Reply #331 on: April 21, 2017, 02:12:18 pm »
Ignore

in order for Labour to get a majority of 1 they'd need a uniform swing around the levels that Blair got in 1997

I think it's fair to say that using Scotland ended up bad for Labour

How? Wouldn't a hung parliament most likely lead to a Labour-SNP government?

Forcing a hung parliament shouldn't be hard (let's forget about the polling for a second).
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24340


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -8.17

View Profile
« Reply #332 on: April 21, 2017, 02:29:46 pm »
Ignore

in order for Labour to get a majority of 1 they'd need a uniform swing around the levels that Blair got in 1997

I think it's fair to say that using Scotland ended up bad for Labour

How? Wouldn't a hung parliament most likely lead to a Labour-SNP government?

Forcing a hung parliament shouldn't be hard (let's forget about the polling for a second).

Labour hate the SNP more than the SNP. They've always had a disdain for any other political outfit that shares their turf (or takes their voters) Labour have went hard on unionist in Scotland with some calling for people to tactically vote Tory against the SNP. What's left of the party membership (which may actually be in the region of a few thousand) are not as converted to that cause as the party think.

The reality is that there had to be some sort of understanding in place with the SNP to govern 'after 2020' (when that looked like a possibility), assuming the SNP retain their dominance in Scotland.

Here's Kezia back in 2007 after she was rejected by the SNP but before she worked her way up to Labour leader



So this is the sort of mentality Labour 'in England' would have to work with. Which is why it's not going to happen.
Logged

kyc0705
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1156
Korea, Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #333 on: April 21, 2017, 02:44:50 pm »
Ignore

In light of the complete garbage Political Compass put out about France, what do you think they'll do for the UK?

They'll probably go back to putting the main parties in the blue corner like in 2015



Only the Greens and regionalist/Northern Irish parties managed to escape, and  many were pretty close to the centre anyways

Except that the guy who makes Political Compass seems to be the sort of person who would have a hard-on for Jeremy Corbyn, so I'd expect him to move Labour to just below-left of center.

Can I make some guesses? Their analysis of the election will include a diatribe in which Corbyn's policies are called "refreshing." They will also make frustrated comments about "unforgiving scrutinizing from an unsympathetic media climate."

This, of course, will only come after several paragraphs about May's Conservatives participating in the "globalization project even in a post-Brexit environment." Finally, there will be some oddly positive statements about UKIP, which they will then hastily qualify with it just being a matter of their protectionism.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 02:47:06 pm by kyc0705 »Logged

Me IRL:

Blair
Blair2015
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5541
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #334 on: April 21, 2017, 03:04:08 pm »
Ignore

in order for Labour to get a majority of 1 they'd need a uniform swing around the levels that Blair got in 1997

I think it's fair to say that using Scotland ended up bad for Labour

How? Wouldn't a hung parliament most likely lead to a Labour-SNP government?

Forcing a hung parliament shouldn't be hard (let's forget about the polling for a second).

The quirk of our system is that you don't need a Labour-SNP government (e.g SNP having cabinet posts) but you'd rather just say to the SNP that they should support the government on confidence votes+budget+Queens Speech in exchange for some changes.

An interesting change is that a lot of 'unionist' voters are now voting in a bloc in Scotland more so than in 2015 (or so I've read)

So we could have a lot of Labour/Liberals voting for Tories in certain seats, and so on.
Logged

Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6525


View Profile
« Reply #335 on: April 21, 2017, 03:13:55 pm »
Ignore

in order for Labour to get a majority of 1 they'd need a uniform swing around the levels that Blair got in 1997

I think it's fair to say that using Scotland ended up bad for Labour

How? Wouldn't a hung parliament most likely lead to a Labour-SNP government?

Forcing a hung parliament shouldn't be hard (let's forget about the polling for a second).

The quirk of our system is that you don't need a Labour-SNP government (e.g SNP having cabinet posts) but you'd rather just say to the SNP that they should support the government on confidence votes+budget+Queens Speech in exchange for some changes.

An interesting change is that a lot of 'unionist' voters are now voting in a bloc in Scotland more so than in 2015 (or so I've read)

So we could have a lot of Labour/Liberals voting for Tories in certain seats, and so on.

Indeed this is how governments are usually formed at Westminster without majorities. The full coalition of 2010 through the results of an election was more of an aberration than the norm.  
« Last Edit: April 21, 2017, 03:32:25 pm by Barnes »Logged

Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 61421
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #336 on: April 21, 2017, 03:30:52 pm »
Ignore

The LibDems have just nominated an unrepentant racist at Bradford East.
Logged



doktorb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1071
United Kingdom


View Profile WWW
« Reply #337 on: April 21, 2017, 03:53:08 pm »
Ignore

What I always remember about UK elections and this Forum are the annual questions from Americans and others unfamiliar with the results announcement spectacle of candidates lined up on a platform wearing over sized rosettes, and long may that polite confusion remain.
Logged

My blog - http://www.liampennington.blogspot.com

Twitter - @doktorb
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6525


View Profile
« Reply #338 on: April 21, 2017, 04:11:23 pm »
Ignore

What I always remember about UK elections and this Forum are the annual questions from Americans and others unfamiliar with the results announcement spectacle of candidates lined up on a platform wearing over sized rosettes, and long may that polite confusion remain.

Well I prefer addressing some polite confusion than answering "will UKIP get a majority?" Grin
Logged

Blair
Blair2015
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5541
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #339 on: April 21, 2017, 04:39:39 pm »
Ignore

The LibDems have just nominated an unrepentant racist at Bradford East.

Is that the same guy who use to be their MP?
Logged

Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6525


View Profile
« Reply #340 on: April 21, 2017, 05:40:35 pm »
Ignore

The LibDems have just nominated an unrepentant racist at Bradford East.

Is that the same guy who use to be their MP?

The one and the only.
Logged

Clyde1998
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2752
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #341 on: April 21, 2017, 05:49:05 pm »
Ignore

http://www.itv.com/news/border/2017-04-20/fish-finger-to-take-on-tim-farron-in-election/

Tim Farron has his first competitor in his seat - a Fish Finger. Cheesy
Logged

Devout Centrist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4142
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.80, S: -8.78

View Profile
« Reply #342 on: April 21, 2017, 06:16:57 pm »
Ignore

This is embarrassing
Logged

One pissed off likely voter
Insert clever user name here
Old Europe
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7923


View Profile
« Reply #343 on: April 21, 2017, 06:24:25 pm »
Ignore

http://www.itv.com/news/border/2017-04-20/fish-finger-to-take-on-tim-farron-in-election/

Tim Farron has his first competitor in his seat - a Fish Finger. Cheesy

Someone had to give him the finger..
Logged

Quote
We will immediately repeal and replace ObamaCare - and nobody can do that like me. We will save $'s and have much better healthcare!

    ó Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 9, 2016

Quote
Obama's complaints about Republicans stopping his agenda are BS since he had full control for two years. He can never take responsibility.

    ó Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 26, 2012
parochial boy
parochial_boy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 895


Political Matrix
E: -8.38, S: -6.78

View Profile
« Reply #344 on: April 21, 2017, 06:28:13 pm »
Ignore

The LibDems have just nominated an unrepentant racist at Bradford East.

Is that the same guy who use to be their MP?

The one and the only.

Sadly, some of his more unpleasant views are probably quite a good fit for that particular constituency
Logged
Vosem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9715
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -6.26

P P

View Profile
« Reply #345 on: April 21, 2017, 06:30:42 pm »
Ignore

The LibDems have just nominated an unrepentant racist at Bradford East.

Is that the same guy who use to be their MP?

The one and the only.

Ugh, why are European parties terrible
Logged

I will NOT be accepting any result other than a victory for America's next President, Governor Gary Earl Johnson Angry
rob in cal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1425
View Profile
« Reply #346 on: April 21, 2017, 10:44:27 pm »
Ignore

  While it doesn't look like it will be happening, I'm intrigued by the idea of an anti-Tory electoral pact and its effectiveness.  Would it in fact help to win seats if Greens, Lib Dems and Labour put up one candidate in the main marginal or thought to be marginal seats?  Or would there be a counter movement, say UKIP candidates standing down in favor of all solid pro-Brexit tory candidates?
    One would think that there would be at least some room for an anti-Tory pact, at least in some limited seats, where two of the three opponents would have no chance to win, but even this doesn't seem likely.  Seems to me a missed opportunity.
Logged
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1878
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #347 on: April 22, 2017, 02:09:55 am »
Ignore

  While it doesn't look like it will be happening, I'm intrigued by the idea of an anti-Tory electoral pact and its effectiveness.  Would it in fact help to win seats if Greens, Lib Dems and Labour put up one candidate in the main marginal or thought to be marginal seats?  Or would there be a counter movement, say UKIP candidates standing down in favor of all solid pro-Brexit tory candidates?
    One would think that there would be at least some room for an anti-Tory pact, at least in some limited seats, where two of the three opponents would have no chance to win, but even this doesn't seem likely.  Seems to me a missed opportunity.

There's probably little advantage in a formal pact.  In a place like Bath (for example) in this election (not in 2015) most Labour supporters who would vote Lib Dem if Labour didn't stand are likely to vote Lib Dem tactically anyway, and a Labour endorsement might put some right-wing voters off voting Lib Dem.  And in Lab/Con marginals it's not at all clear that the absence of a Lib Dem candidate would even move things in the right direction, while those places tend to have few enough Green voters that their withdrawal wouldn't make much difference (and of course some of them will be Green die-hards who wouldn't vote Labour anyway).

And it would be horrendously difficult to actually get a pact going.  There are quite a few Labour people who hate the Lib Dems, and vice versa.  The Greens seem keenest on the idea, but what would Labour and the Lib Dems actually be able to give them?

So the most that's likely to happen is some tactical voting campaigns, which won't be officially endorsed by the parties.  The Greens may unilaterally withdraw in a few areas, but it won't make much difference, and I'd be surprised if either Labour or the Lib Dems did.

Logged

Anybody But Conservative
joevsimp
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 468


Political Matrix
E: -5.95, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #348 on: April 22, 2017, 04:55:49 am »
Ignore

Yeah, that's the most likely at this point I think, I've been critical of CL/JB banging on so much about Progressive Alliance for a while, my branch also put in a motion at conference last year pointing out that it had not been voted on as party policy (it has now though I think).  I was also not surprised to see Labour reject it out of hand so quickly, what with Clause 1 and everything

muttering's I have heard so far are potentially Greens standing down in one of both seats in Plymouth which was one of the places in 2015 that the tory majority was smaller than the Green vote, but the issue is that we barely campaigned there, those voters actively chose not to vote for the Labour party and Labour can't expect to have them delivered on a platter without working to win them over.

Labour branch in Jeremy Hunt's seat in Surrey are considering standing down as well, but IMHO this should be so that they can get behind the NHS Action candidate who got 10% last time, rather than the Lib Dems, of course there's precedent for the LibDems backing that party's forerunners in Kidderminster in 2001, not that Labour would like to be reminded of that.

tl;dr, everyone's ideological baggage and mutual distrusts make PA a non starter, could've been done for 2020, but no chance this quickly, which I think was a minor contribution to May's deision to go for the snap poll
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12159
United States


View Profile
« Reply #349 on: April 22, 2017, 05:02:24 am »
Ignore

All voters in all GB constituencies should have the opportunity to vote for a Labour candidate.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 85 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines