UK General Discussion: 2017 and onwards, Mayhem

[mileslunn]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-41235522

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good news for May, Bad News for Corbyn?

Brexit could be a divisive issue for Labour.  Much of the younger vote, those in university towns, London, ethnic minorities as well as Scotland (where they need to gain to get a majority) favour remaining in the single market, but much of Labour's core vote in the Industrial North voted heavily to leave thus the dilemma.  Come too heavily on the leave side and risk doing poorly in Scotland perhaps more splitting of the progressive vote with the Liberal Democrats while come out in favour of staying in the single market and risk losing all the marginal seats in the Industrial North.

[mileslunn]

I've heard Boris Johnson behind the scenes is trying to mount a challenge to May.  What do you think his chances are of pushing May out?  Also being a younger urban leader, do you think he would help the party do better in a general election.  Also I noticed momentum and Labour Party are going hard after his seat which they lost by only 10%, do you think Labour has any realistic chance of winning his seat next time around?  I tend to think that while Labour may have a strong second place showing in his constituency or perhaps not, winning it is unlikely.  Constituencies like Putney or Finchley and Golder's Green are probably more likely to flip while Richmond Park could go Liberal Democrat.  At the same time I could see the Tories regaining Kensington as I think that was a shock to most so they will probably put more resources into it next time around whereas in the recent election they just assumed it would always go Tory as it has in the past.

[mileslunn]

Add to that the economic and logistical disaster that will follow anything but a business-as-usual seamless transition, which would be unacceptable to the Brexit fundamentalists in the Tory ranks.

The real tragedy is that with the Tories so consumed by their petty internal squabbles, the bureaucratic and constitutional process of extricating the UK from the EU is receiving hardly any attention or thought. It was a dreadful idea to begin with but this just ensures it will be a catastrophe for the Tories and the country (possibly not in that order).

The only bright side is that Labour is going to run against such a mess, and be bequeathed such a ruthlessly centralized system of cabinet/committee legislative prerogatives, they'll be able to enact an agenda more sweeping and revolutionary than they ever would have if the Tories had gone for a soft Brexit.

That assumes Labour wins next time around.  The polls are still fairly close and I suspect the Tories will hit the Labour much harder with their attacks.  Also the strong turnout amongst millennials may or may not materialize again.  Never mind if a true hung parliament where the Liberal Democrats are the party holding the balance of power expect another quick election.  Also I think with a different leader the Tories might do a bit better.  While others disagree, I think Boris Johnson with his common touch and also more urban oriented would help the party somewhat.  Although if they fall far enough in the polls might not matter.

[mileslunn]

Add to that the economic and logistical disaster that will follow anything but a business-as-usual seamless transition, which would be unacceptable to the Brexit fundamentalists in the Tory ranks.

The real tragedy is that with the Tories so consumed by their petty internal squabbles, the bureaucratic and constitutional process of extricating the UK from the EU is receiving hardly any attention or thought. It was a dreadful idea to begin with but this just ensures it will be a catastrophe for the Tories and the country (possibly not in that order).

The only bright side is that Labour is going to run against such a mess, and be bequeathed such a ruthlessly centralized system of cabinet/committee legislative prerogatives, they'll be able to enact an agenda more sweeping and revolutionary than they ever would have if the Tories had gone for a soft Brexit.

That assumes Labour wins next time around.  The polls are still fairly close and I suspect the Tories will hit the Labour much harder with their attacks.  Also the strong turnout amongst millennials may or may not materialize again.  Never mind if a true hung parliament where the Liberal Democrats are the party holding the balance of power expect another quick election.  Also I think with a different leader the Tories might do a bit better.  While others disagree, I think Boris Johnson with his common touch and also more urban oriented would help the party somewhat.  Although if they fall far enough in the polls might not matter.

This may have been true in 2012 (I always thought Boris was extremely over-hyped as a retail politician; his only achievement being beating Ken Livingstone during Labours lowest polling period in 2008, and again in 2012 when most people thought Ken was a tax dodging anti-Semite.)

But it's certainly not true now; Boris is absolutely toxic after the referendum to remain voters. His likability has absolutely plummeted, in the last campaign he was just sent to leave areas and he's also not helped by the various gaffes he's made as foreign secretary.

The Tories best hope is to someone stretch out the election until 2022; and hope that someone new can be given enough time as a minister, such as James Cleverly, Ruth Davidson etc. They'd almost benefit from going into opposition and having a completely fresh face.

It's starting to look like Labour in 09-10 when everyone knew Brown had to go, but no-one really wanted to be Prime Minister.

I agree Labour could win a plurality, but considering how polarizing Corbyn is where exactly would he pick up the 64 seats he needs to win a majority.  Scotland I guess is a wildcard, but in England/Wales there are only 30 maybe 40 at most seats they could realistically flip.  Any constituency the Tories got over 50% will be tough to flip unless the Liberal Democrats or UKIP does better next time as I don't think many Tory voters will move over to a Corbyn led Labour.  Now if Andy Burnham, Owen Smith, or Sadiq Khan were leader that is a different story.  Never mind some traditional blue collar constituencies in the midlands and north like Barrow in Furness, Bishop Auckland, Dudley North, Newcastle Under Lyme, and Ashfield are trending heavily towards the Conservatives thus even if Labour gains, trends would suggest they are at risk of losing these.  While a bit tedious, do you have a list of 64 constituencies you realistically think Corbyn could flip or at least describe what parts of the country that they currently hold that could flip as I cannot seem to find them.  My best case scenario has Labour at around 310 seats while worse case has them falling to around 240 seats.  For the Tories I have best case around 340 seats so a majority and worst case around 270 seats.

[mileslunn]

... Any constituency the Tories got over 50% will be tough to flip unless the Liberal Democrats or UKIP does better next time ...

Question asked, question answered.

As you point out, with the main parties so polarizing - Labour due to Corbyn, the Tories due to Brexit - they've both probably maxed out the percentage of the vote they can expect to win (Labour has a bit more room to grow, especially in Scotland). Should the Tories continue to implode through another general election, their loss will be attributable as much to their core voters staying home or opting for the Lib Dems and UKIP as to Labour picking up support (from anywhere).

One relevant piece of evidence: just after the June election YouGov (I think) did some polling of voters who considered Labour for a time but ended up opting for another party. Their findings were that Corbyn, his allegedly divisive/radical/leftwing policies, and the Labour party's ideological stance generally were not what dissuaded these voters. What did dissuade them was the perception that Labour was haphazard and would not be able to deliver once in power.

As for seats to target, this site gives you a run down. As you can see, it would take a swing of just over 3.5% to deliver the 65 seats needed for an outright majority, and a swing of just 1.5% to tie the Tories in seats (which would almost certainly lead to a Labour-led government with the Lib Dems/SNP all but guaranteeing a full term; their supporters would never forgive them for bringing the Tories back after finally throwing them out). Over half the target seats on that list are in Wales, Scotland, or London - places where Labour has traditionally done well and did particularly/surprisingly well in June.

Put in perspective, the swing to Labour in June was 4.1%. In 1997 - the last time they won back government after a long spell of Tory government ripped apart by Europe - it was 8.8%.

In terms of specific seats, do you think Boris Johnson's seat could be in danger or his is rather safe?  I know ones like Amber Rudd would almost certainly lose if Labour wins and likewise I suspect Iain Duncan Smith would face a tough fight.  Another interesting one that was somewhat competitive was Rushcliffe which in the past has been a safe Tory constituency although my understanding is Labour does well in the suburban parts in the north which have grown while the rural portions still go heavily Tory.  Nonetheless I think as long as Kenneth Clarke is MP he should hold it, but once he retires it could be vulnerable.  On the other hand I think Tim Farron's riding will likely flip back to the Tories while Norman Lamb's riding will probably flip back whenever he retires as his riding has all the demographics to be a Tory one and more votes Liberal Democrat because of him rather than any real Lib Dem support.  Constituencies like Bishop Auckland, Newcastle under Lyme, Ashfield, Penistone & Stocksbridge, and Dudley North all have groups that are moving away from Labour so even with favourable polls now those could easily flip to the Tories.

[mileslunn]

In the never ending combination of Brexit wars it looks like Phillip Hammond (nicknamed spreadsheet Phil, later revised to spreadsh**t Phil) is going to face another difficult budget.

It's worth noting the tories haven't had a successful budget since summer 2015; autumn 2015 had the tax credit fiasco, summer 2016 was the 'project fear' budget that angered the right, and the spring budget this year had the chaos of the National Insurance tax rise on small businesses.

I expect this current one will lead to some crisis; the government has such a small majority that 1 or 2 MPs can just cough some objection, and it virtually leads to a climbdown.

And well this would be hard in normal times, but Hammond has to deal with the black hole of Brexit and the mouth breathers on the right, whilst also trying to show that he understands that the Tories need some sort of electoral offer to both the young and the old.


However he could easily get sacked after the Budget, as a fair amount of tories are calling for him to be sacked; and replaced with Gove.

I thought Tory-DUP actually gives realistically a 6 seat cushion as the 7 Sinn Fein MPs have an abstentionist policy so they are never in the House to vote the government down.  If the Sinn Fein MPs actually showed up the government would be in much greater danger of falling as they only need to lose two by-elections which is probably likely prior to 2022 whereas losing 7 seems like a lot.  Do you know how many they lost between 1992-1997 and if they do lose 7, how long did it take as that would be good basis to go on.

[mileslunn]

In the never ending combination of Brexit wars it looks like Phillip Hammond (nicknamed spreadsheet Phil, later revised to spreadsh**t Phil) is going to face another difficult budget.

It's worth noting the tories haven't had a successful budget since summer 2015; autumn 2015 had the tax credit fiasco, summer 2016 was the 'project fear' budget that angered the right, and the spring budget this year had the chaos of the National Insurance tax rise on small businesses.

I expect this current one will lead to some crisis; the government has such a small majority that 1 or 2 MPs can just cough some objection, and it virtually leads to a climbdown.

And well this would be hard in normal times, but Hammond has to deal with the black hole of Brexit and the mouth breathers on the right, whilst also trying to show that he understands that the Tories need some sort of electoral offer to both the young and the old.


However he could easily get sacked after the Budget, as a fair amount of tories are calling for him to be sacked; and replaced with Gove.

I thought Tory-DUP actually gives realistically a 6 seat cushion as the 7 Sinn Fein MPs have an abstentionist policy so they are never in the House to vote the government down.  If the Sinn Fein MPs actually showed up the government would be in much greater danger of falling as they only need to lose two by-elections which is probably likely prior to 2022 whereas losing 7 seems like a lot.  Do you know how many they lost between 1992-1997 and if they do lose 7, how long did it take as that would be good basis to go on.

The SNP, considering how they did in the last election, are not likely to vote for another one.

In other news, new Labour MP accused of sexist comments

The MP who defeated Nick Clegg for all things.  Wonder how people will feel although probably won't matter.  I was wondering how come Nick Clegg survived the 2015 route but couldn't survive 2017?  Was it stronger youth turnout that did him in as I suspect some Tories probably tactically voted for him to stop a Labour win.

Also another new MP who is embarrassment is Laura Pidcock who said she won't hang out with Tories.  From what I've read on her she seems like a real left wing firebrand and SJW, sort of Britain's version of Niki Ashton here in Canada.

The other nutty one but has been around for a long time is Dennis Skinner who seems to be fairly far out there.  Ironically his constituency has become more competitive so the Tories might have a shot at it if he resigns or dies (he is in his 80s now).

[mileslunn]

With Sheffield Hallam, could this trigger a by-election?  I suspect Labour would probably hold it but with lower turnout do you think the Liberal Democrats if Clegg runs or the Tories if he doesn't have any chance.

As for Dennis Skinner, the only reason I brought this up is I noticed in the traditional blue collar small towns in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, Tories made gains picking up Northeast Derbyshire, Mansfield and almost winning Ashfield thus why I thought Skinner's and perhaps longer term Basseltaw might be vulnerable.  On the other hand the suburban Nottingham constituencies saw a positive swing towards Labour so Broxtowe and perhaps Erewash could easily flip and if a strong enough swing maybe Sherwood but not likely.  Even Rushcliffe could become vulnerable once Kenneth Clarke retires, especially under the proposed boundary changes which lop off a lot of the southern rural parts where the Tories are strongest.

As for Laura Pidcock, if listened to her speeches and she sounds pretty far out there and pretty bitter towards the Tories, so not sure the 34% who voted Tory in her riding particularly like that.  Mind you considering how hard in the past especially under Thatcher the Northeast was hit, I've heard a fair number of Labour in the North do hate the Tories with that or greater passion.  Some even celebrated Thatcher's death (not suggesting she did, but there were people who did which I think is below anyone, I hate Donald Trump with a passion but I wouldn't celebrate when he dies) so perhaps maybe she is a reflection of many of her constituents, perhaps more her age group, or maybe she just is a millennial type Tony Benn.  I just know the tabloids owned by Murdoch love to mock her as well as Skinner

[mileslunn]

very little chance, unless O'Mara is accused of anything worse than being an edgy gobsh**te (i.e. if he turns out to be a sex pest or the like). More likely he'll be given the Naz Shah treatment.

It's been true for quite some time that the Midlands respond very well to "culture war" based campaigns, so it's no surprise they swung Toryways. Whether it is indicative of a broader trend is another matter.

As for Pidcock, well, I suppose it would be difficult for outsiders to get, but the sort of tribal anti-Toryism plays well in those sort of areas, even amongst more moderate members of the PLP.

I kind of thought with Laura Pidcock location and age were a big factor.  Certainly in her neck of the woods Margaret Thatcher still remains quite hated.  Also age as at least here in Canada, maybe UK is different, I find the younger partisans tend to be a lot more rabid.  Back in my university days 15 years ago we would have lively debates with those of different views but still go out for drinks after whereas now it seems both sides seem to want nothing to do with the other side and she is a bit younger than me and a millennial as opposed to border Gen X/Millennial, which I am.  I also would be a Tory if I lived in Britain as I am centre-right and I only support the Democrats in the US because of how far right the GOP has swung and in Canada I am sort of torn as I don't like how the Liberals have swung leftward, but not happy with the strong Reform party element in the Tories which the British Tories have those types, but it seems not as many as ours and they also seem to still have more One Nation Conservatives or as we call Red Tories which have largely been banished from conservative parties in North America.  Still I doubt she will pick up very many soft Tory voters next time around, but probably doesn't need to although the boundary changes depending on how they go could either make her constituency more safe if it is centred more around the industrial towns or more marginal if it includes a larger rural portion than now.

[mileslunn]

I loved Laura Pidcock before finding out that she voted for a £42m worth of cuts in her time on Northumberland county council. And no, nothing about her comments on Tories are in any way objectionable.

Doesn't that just debase politics.  Maybe I am looking at it from too much of a North American angle, but the extreme polarization you see in US politics is in large part because people from the other sides don't wish to talk to each other, so I fail to see how it is a good thing.  Part of the reason the GOP has become so extreme is they stay in their echo chambers and don't hear from anything that doesn't support their views or communicate with those with different views, so I think for Labour or as a matter of fact any party this not the way to go.

[mileslunn]

The other Labour MP or newly elected one who seems pretty far out there is Chris Williamson and he interestingly enough actually regained a seat for them.  Maybe its my bias but a lot of the Corbynites seem a little loony to me, but perhaps I am more used to the new Labour under the Blair era which were moderate centre-left progressive, but fairly centrist.  The one big time Corbyn supporter who seems alright is Cat Smith.  She is fairly left wing, but doesn't come across as a firebrand and she only bare won her seat in 2015 while won by almost 15 points in 2017.  Emily Thornberry seems fairly left wing although despite standing strongly behind Corbyn, not sure if she was a supporter of him initially.  I did like her Boris joke at the Labour conference though.  And off course there is John McDonnell who has always been one of the more left wing members.

Does anyone know how many Blairites are still left or have most of them moved on?  I don't mean MPs who were members during the Blair government, but rather people who were strongly supportive of Tony Blair's agenda.  In particular are there any pro-war Labour MPs who voted for Iraq still there?

[mileslunn]

Sir Michael Fallon has resigned as Defence Secretary.

Is he resigning from Parliament as well? If he does how safe is his seat?

I'm not sure if he will resign from Parliament, but his seat is a safe Conservative seat.

He got over 60% last time so even if the Tories were reduced to only 50 seats, his would be amongst them.  That being said if Labour really wants to help out, their best option would be to not run a candidate and instead endorse the Liberal Democrat candidate although even the Liberal Democrats are highly unlikely to win his seat.  1923 is the last time it elected a non-Tory MP and that was a Liberal.

[mileslunn]

The Blairite faction was dead in May 2015 when Chukka dropped out, and they split between supporting Burnham,(Falconer, Blunkett etc) Cooper (Alan Johnson) and Kendall. I could write a lot more about how the actual right of Labour (of which even I don't identity with) has been unpopular for years, has a lack of money, a lack of talent and no real support in the PLP.

While the Blairite faction is controversial, wouldn't the party benefit from moving towards the centre.  They did well in bringing out younger voters, but under Corbyn they had one of their worst showings ever amongst seniors and as long as seniors massively vote against Labour it will be tough to get 326 seats.  Maybe a plurality, but if the party could get back up into the high 20s instead of only 20% amongst seniors that would be enough to win provided they maintain their millennial support and I suspect a more moderate Labour could bring some of those back.

Also there is voter efficiency.  Corbyn may have done as well in votes as Blair did, but he tended to run up the margins in the urban core areas while outside of the main cities didn't perform as well as Blair except for safe Tory ridings where Blair did worse but they weren't going to win anyways.  Otherwise a more moderate one might be able to win back constituencies like Copeland, Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, Stoke on Trent South, Walsall North, Nuneaton, Mansfield, Derbyshire North East, and be more competitive in the Kent constituencies such as Dartford and Rainham and Gillingham which Blair was able to win but Corbyn lost badly.  Otherwise in a lot of the smaller town/suburban constituencies Blair did better.  Of the urban ones, there aren't that many left for picking up and the demographics in those such as Cities of London and Westminster are not exactly Labour friendly.

Thus wouldn't the party benefit with more Third way types while at the same time still having a strong Corbynite wing?  Corbyn may have got over 40% of the popular vote, but so did the Tories whereas under Blair the Tories never got over 1/3 of the vote.  Now with the collapse of the LibDems that might be possible, but if Labour wants to get a majority they either have to crack the 45% mark which will be tough or push the Tories down to around 36-37% which with the collapse of UKIP and LibDems will be tough as well.

[mileslunn]

Labour is led by Corbyn but it is by no means a Corbynite party as a whole. The manifesto this year was committed to renewing Trident (the classic left/right dividing line issue in the party) for example.

True enough although on some things like re-nationalizing rail, water, and utilities clearly favoured the left side although interestingly enough polls show most Brits want those re-nationalized, but perhaps the cost might be the one deterrent.  Abolishing tuition fees also comes from the left side at least compared to recently although interestingly enough the Liberal Democrats in 2010 and Tories in 2005 advocated this position so not totally radical, at least not in UK (in Canada and the US, abolishing tuition fees is a radical position).  In terms of raising corporate taxes and taxes on the top 5%, the former was just putting it up to levels in 2010 while latter goes further than Blair went (top rate was 40% under him vs. the current 45%), but in line with both Brown and Miliband who favoured a top rate of 50% (Corbyn was vague here so possible he wanted to raise it further, certainly he could got as high as 55% and still not be in the highest in EU, although 60% as Caroline Lucas advocated would make UK the highest in the EU unless you include payroll taxes as a few go above that when that is included).

I think his biggest obstacle was more his past positions which were a lot more radical vs. platform which while left wing was not totally offside the majority of population.  In the last decade due to stagnant growth, many left wing policies that fell out of style in the 70s are starting to rebound in public support (ironic he won big amongst those who don't remember the 70s while did poorly amongst those who do).  In the US you saw a similar phenomenon with Bernie Sanders who most older voters found too radical, but was very popular with younger voters.

[mileslunn]

I wouldn't say Copeland is totally lost as Labour almost won it and using a uniform swing it is one they would need to pick up just to tie the Tories in seats forget about actually winning especially a majority so using the current polls right now it's quite possible Labour could regain it.  Nonetheless that is the problem I was mentioning with Corbyn and seems to be a problem with progressive parties in many countries.  Do well in the urban cores but struggle in the hinterlands whereas back when Third Way progressives were leaders they tended to do better in the hinterlands winning the above mentioned constituencies.  Now perhaps maybe the hinterlands have permanently swung to the right, but that is then a long term problem for the left.  Although one notable exception is Justin Trudeau in Canada who did win many suburban and even some rural constituencies although Canada is very different than the UK and it remains to be seen if he can hold those as Obama in 2008 also won many hinterland areas, but gradually they swung away and by 2016 they were pretty much all lost to Trump. 

My reasoning for thinking a more centrist but highly charismatic (if there is such, Sadiq Khan is the only one I can think of top of mind) could win is being more centrist would allow them to do better amongst seniors which Corbyn did horrible amongst and more charismatic would allow them to still bring out millennials in big numbers.  Otherwise Labour to succeed needs to find their own Justin Trudeau or Barack Obama who both fit the bill of more moderate than Corbyn but charismatic so could bring out younger voters in droves without scaring away seniors. 

[mileslunn]

In the most respectful manner possible: it is incredibly stupid to think that the Muslim Mayor of London Sadiq Khan (who I actually like!) is someone that's going to appeal to old folk in "the hinterlands" - which isn't really a useful description for a fair few of the seats on that list; certainly not in comparison to many, many other seats that Labour still hold.  Indeed; when you look at the actual election results bar a few areas (the West Midlands outside Birmingham and bits of the North East) that swung to the Tories generally; most of the country showed an overall swing to Labour and the seats gained by the Tories were oddities that had other factors to explain them.

I agree being a Muslim mayor could be an issue, mind you everybody said Obama being an African-American would be an issue yet look at how well he did in the Midwest compared to Clinton, Kerry, or Gore.  Clinton lost most of it, Gore and Kerry barely win, while Obama handidly won both times and not just in the cities, but many rural areas.  And he also has a Muslim sounding name too so maybe a bad comparison but the fact it worked for Obama who Khan can somewhat be compared to is relevant.  Now if Britain had their own Justin Trudeau they could probably win in those areas, but not sure they do at least not at the moment.  Some of the younger Labour MPs maybe in a decade or so.

[mileslunn]

Kelvin Hopkins (MP for Luton North) suspended by Labour

Apparently sexual harassment allegations.

This will probably help the government last longer as I am not sure those would support any non-confidence motion.  At the moment my understanding is the opposition parties need to pick up six seats in by-elections to be able to bring down the government as the Conservatives + DUP = 327 seats and at 325 seats the speaker would likely break the tie in their favour (former Conservative and Denison's rules say you vote to keep debate going) while Sinn Fein has an abstentionist policy so really only 643 occupied seats so 327 by Conservatives + DUP, 316 by other parties so picking up six would change it to 322 opposition to 321 Conservatives + DUP.

[mileslunn]

I guess I was comparing more to Tony Blair's 2005 win as you saw him win in a number of mixed urban/rural constituencies in Kent, Staffordshire as well as East Midlands where Corbyn not only lost, but wasn't close.  Likewise the Liberal Democrats won many rural ones in the Southwest and most of those the Tories got over 50%.  Likewise if you look at the margins in the core urban ones, Corbyn got over 70% in several constituencies and over 80% in a few whereas I don't think under Blair they ever cracked the 80% mark in any and only in his first win in 1997 did you see them getting over 70% in multiple constituencies not subsequent ones.  You saw the same with Hillary Clinton which is why she won the popular vote despite losing the electoral college.  Also it seems every time the boundaries change, they tend to favour the Tories as I am guessing the suburban areas just beyond the large cities are the fastest growing and popular seaside towns for retirees.

[mileslunn]

I can't be bothered to link to the various headlines but there's a good deal of juicy stuff in tomorrow papers (to the extent I might get up to watch Marr tomorrow morning for the paper summary) Fallon apparently lunged at a journalist; which is why he was sacked, the police found dodgy videos on Damian Green (the de-facto deputy PM) computer and questions are being raised about the whips/leaking that has came from No.10.

Usual warnings; but this is starting to feel like something that may cause the government serious harm.

Polls FWIW seem to suggest a hung parliament with Tories definitely not being able to form a government and Labour facing a fairly tricky one, maybe Labour + SNP perhaps but most polls show both parties would fall shy of 300 seats.  I think the real problem is most are firmly in one camp or another.  Jeremy Corbyn scares way too many soft Tories who maybe open to change, but think he is too radical, while the Tory screw-ups have been too numerous than most soft Labour supporters are determined they need to spend some time in opposition before returning.  Interesting Labour is pushing for lowering the voting age to 16, I am guessing they think they will do better if this happens.

[mileslunn]

For our British posters here, what do you think the chances are of the Tories staying in power until 2022?  Also I know polls are just a snapshot but do any realistically think Labour can win a majority or would it just be plurality and they have to turn to other parties to prop them up?

[mileslunn]

I know it's always said that this is the worst week for a government in years, but this not only beats anything from 2010-2015, but also makes the week in October where the stage fall apart and TM started coughing look like a rather funny joke.

Both the Johnson and Patel incident are damaging to our international reputation, clearly broke the ministerial code, and frankly showed that both had absolutely awful judgement. Neither one has apologized, Pretti Patel has lied about 4 times (including to No.10) and it's just making us look like a complete joke.

The fact that No.10 won't fire either one (Patel should, and most likely will get sacked tomorrow if more comes out) makes me wonder what is the point in Theresa May being Prime Minister? I could understand if she cared about Brexit, or if she wanted to stop someone becoming Leader, but she's actively destroying what's left of her reputation

How come Labour only has a 2 point lead.  Last time the Tories were in as much trouble, Labour had double digit leads which suggests to me contrary to what many think a more centrist leader could lead to a much bigger win, while Corbyn excites the base, but makes many middle of the road voters who may not like the Tories uncomfortable to switch over to Labour.

[mileslunn]

I know it's always said that this is the worst week for a government in years, but this not only beats anything from 2010-2015, but also makes the week in October where the stage fall apart and TM started coughing look like a rather funny joke.

Both the Johnson and Patel incident are damaging to our international reputation, clearly broke the ministerial code, and frankly showed that both had absolutely awful judgement. Neither one has apologized, Pretti Patel has lied about 4 times (including to No.10) and it's just making us look like a complete joke.

The fact that No.10 won't fire either one (Patel should, and most likely will get sacked tomorrow if more comes out) makes me wonder what is the point in Theresa May being Prime Minister? I could understand if she cared about Brexit, or if she wanted to stop someone becoming Leader, but she's actively destroying what's left of her reputation

How come Labour only has a 2 point lead.  Last time the Tories were in as much trouble, Labour had double digit leads which suggests to me contrary to what many think a more centrist leader could lead to a much bigger win, while Corbyn excites the base, but makes many middle of the road voters who may not like the Tories uncomfortable to switch over to Labour.

Again a centrist leader doesn't equal a successful leader

So are you basically saying that no matter how badly the Tories mess up the best Labour can do is lead by a few points?  I don't think a centrist leader guarantees success, but it increases the number of voters open to voting for the party so they have a higher ceiling in terms of potential support.  Whether they manage to achieve that or not is a different story.

[mileslunn]

ideology doesn't matter miles. Only political anoraks care whether somebody is left or right or centre.

True, but policies do and if the change is quite radical from the status quo usually things have to be really bad before people will go for that.  I think the real question is with all the Tory mess up how come Labour cannot pull more than a few points ahead.  That suggests there is something with them that a sizeable contingent is not comfortable with.

[mileslunn]

With a preferential ballot, not a lot would have changed as Labour got over 50% in 222 seats (they won 262 seats) and Tories in 244 seats (they won 317 seats) while Liberal Democrats in Vince Cable's seat, the speaker, and Greens in Caroline Lucas' seat.  Excluding Northern Ireland none of the smaller parties not mentioned cracked the 50% mark.  So excluding Northern Ireland only in 163 constituencies would they gone to a runoff.  Labour might have benefited a bit but not as clear cut as some think.  I suspect any constituency the Liberal Democrats came in second, they would have picked up most second choices as they fall on the political spectrum in between the Tories and Labour, which is why they wanted AV so much as they figured as long as they could come in second and the winner didn't get over 50% they would probably benefit.  Although that was at a time where they came in second in many constituencies whereas last time around there were fewer than 30 constituencies where the scenario described applied. 

As for Labour/Tory votes, I suspect outside of Scotland, the Green vote would have almost all gone Labour, LibDems split fairly evenly with maybe a slight edge to Labour, UKIP gone mostly Tory but a sizeable minority would have gone over to Labour.  Plaid Cymru probably more Labour than Tory but they are more a rural party so I don't think you could add theirs together. 

In Scotland it gets a bit trickier as you not only had tactical voting against the Tories, you had a lot of it against the SNP too.  So in SNP/Tory battles where SNP narrowly edged the Tories I think the Tories would have won as most LibDems would have favoured the Tories over SNP while Labour would have split evenly with those whose main concern was to have a progressive government going SNP and those whose main concern was to stop another independence referendum going Tory.  On the other hand Labour probably would have done a lot better in Scotland as in SNP/Labour battles in the Central belt, especially Glasgow, I suspect most Tory voters would have ranked Labour higher than the SNP.  SNP may lean left and have more in common with Labour than the Tories but comparing 2015 and 2017 results suggest more swung over to the Tories than Labour so tough to say how they would go.  So in sum under AV or run off ballots it would probably be another hung parliament although the Tories wouldn't be able to rely on the DUP to prop them up so perhaps Corbyn would be PM, but it would be a very shaky one.

Under PR, if you assume people would vote the same way (which they would not) it would be the Liberal Democrats who would hold the balance of power and they said they wouldn't prop up either although facing pressure to avoid another election I suspect they would throw their support behind whomever promised a soft Brexit and another referendum once the deal was finalized.

However with PR people would vote differently.  Greens and UKIP would have done a lot better as would have even the Liberal Democrats at least in seats (they would have gotten in lot fewer votes in the constituencies they won as most of those were either tactical votes or personal votes for the MP, but more in the constituencies they were uncompetitive in as it appears in most places most LibDems voted for their second choice).  Likewise it's quite possible an outright racist/fascist party similar to the BNP would win seats as more than 5% of Brits are outright racists whereas you cannot win any seat in FTFP on an outright racist platform.  Also a harder left party probably would have existed too as most on the hard left throw their support behind Corbyn as they know under FTFP he is the furthest left the country will ever get, but under PR there would be every incentive for your Trotskyites and hardcore leftist to vote for an even more left wing party to have an influence in pushing him leftward.  So with PR the results would have been totally different as parties would behave differently and people would vote for their first choice whereas under FTFP most vote for whichever between Labour and Tory they dislike least or at least in most constituencies people vote whatever of the top two likely parties they dislike least as opposed to what they want.

That being said I prefer majoritarian systems is it keeps local representation, keeps fringe parties out, and leads to more stable governments on balance.

[mileslunn]

Damian Green, the (de facto) Deputy PM, has resigned.

Looks like he's been sacked. I never get why they have this stupid facade where they say 'they asked for his resignation.''

Am a tad surprised; although it's been drawn out for so long, and was done on the last day of term for the Tories. If he had resigned in November when this was all brewing it would have been a lot worse.

Will cause a slight cabinet reshuffle, and we'll need a new deputy PM. Most likely Amber Rudd

Labour has been calling for Boris Johnson to be sacked.  Any chance that will happen or would that be too risky as he seems to be the frontrunner to secede May so best to keep your enemies closest.