UK General Election, 2017 - Election Day and Results Thread (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 09, 2024, 06:25:41 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  UK General Election, 2017 - Election Day and Results Thread (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: UK General Election, 2017 - Election Day and Results Thread  (Read 147128 times)
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,873
United Kingdom


« on: June 09, 2017, 02:18:16 AM »

I hadn't realized so many constituencies had flipped from Labour to the Tories. Anything particular about these places?

Often seats that didn't have a large Green+Lib Dem vote+ higher leave vote.

I'm still in shock about these results; and spend the night trying to work out what's happening. The seats that Labour won really mean that there is not one answer to why Labour did so well. Corbyn has absolutely gained a right to continue changing the Labour Party; and well we're going to having to be getting ready for a general election in October.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,873
United Kingdom


« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2017, 03:48:41 AM »

Why was Tim Farron's constituency so close? He only won by like 777 votes. I thought he was the safest Lib Dem?

Even though they won seats it seems that most of their seats are in precarious situations.

Northern Seat that was held by the Tories until 2005, and had a large leave vote IIRC. Tories also poured a lot of resources into it
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,873
United Kingdom


« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2017, 06:18:20 AM »

The boundary review process is generally a sh**t storm for parties; the tories have a pledge that no Tory MP would lose a seat they can win (e.g if your seat gets abolished you get parachuted somewhere else) It generally requires a lot of work by the Whips, and endless amounts of trading.

I can't see them touching it when they're currently saying the Queens Speech is going to be delayed
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,873
United Kingdom


« Reply #3 on: June 23, 2017, 03:19:38 PM »

FWIW with the DUP they're just playing their hand, and whilst they will most likely kick the government in the balls on certain votes (most likely welfare related) they will not vote to kill the government, and allow a General Election, and then let Corbyn potentially win.

It just means we're going to have a very unproductive, and rather rebellious parliament
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,873
United Kingdom


« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2017, 05:26:52 PM »

Election retrospectives are quite often useless exercises in 20/20 hindsight, but I'd be interested in hearing the reaction to this article from some of the Labour activists I seem to recall being on the thread.

The article has now been removed; and I wouldn't call myself an activist anymore (since the last campaign I worked on was Smith's leadership bid last summer) but from what I remember the article was pretty baseless, and seemed to be someone just swiping at Unite+GMB over a few tactical decisions.

All the evidence; Copeland by-election, local elections, polling, focus groups, canvassing etc suggested that we were going to get slaughtered in seats in the Midlands and North, and that seats with less than a 7K majority were under threat. This meant the party had to give up on ultra-marginals like Chester, Wirral etc.

I knew someone who worked for the Tory campaign in Yorkshire, and they're polling+campaigning was confirming this at first. Of course there was a clear switch in the election campaign (even myself, as one of the most devout corbynskeptics expected the party to get more than 200 seats)

There seems to be some sniping from those on the left but outside of the party structures that HQ sabotaged the campaign/didn't do enough. To make a strained comparison it certainly seems similar to the relationship between the RNC and Trump; Corbyn inspired lots of people who didn't vote Labour in 2015 (greens, students, non-voters etc) and Labour used it's money/operations to turn these people out.

One thought I had about this election is that there was a consensus that  Brown should have called an election after the 2007 Labour conference.  Failure to do so dogged him the next few years and setup defeat in 2010.  Perhaps given what happen to May in 2017 how Brown handled or should have handled the  2007 Labour conference might now be viewed differently?

Yes. Lots of ex-brown staffers have said that it confirms what they thought about 2007; and I've always said the comparisons between May and Brown are apt.

Brown would have followed the may playbook; avoid debates, attach Cameron as weak etc. And Cameron would have had his inheritance tax pledge which would have done wonders in southern marginals.

The expectations for 2007 were different; no-one thought that Brown would gain seats, whereas May was expected to gain 100+.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 10 queries.