General Election 2017

[Xela]

31 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Osborne wasn't on TV this much (i.e. as much as he has been since Thursday night) when he was chancellor. He certainly never looked this happy.

He looked like the cat that got the cream this morning. 

[snowychap]

Torygraph:

Quote

Labour have gained a five-point lead over the Conservatives following a disastrous general election night, according to the latest poll. 

A Survation study puts Jeremy Corbyn's party on 45 per cent and the Tories on just 39 per cent. 

The dramatic reversal in the Labour leader's fortunes comes after the most damaging 48 hours of Theresa May's career.

However, Survation for the Mail on Sunday found that Mrs May and Mr Corbyn are neck-and-neck when the public were asked who would make the best prime minister - with both leaders on 39 per cent.

...more on link

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I have little doubt that the historical narrative will be about how Corbyn got better during the campaign and how May got worse but it seems to me that the dramatic turnaround has been manufactured by the media, by using the polls which were predicting an 82 seat majority for the Tories, to claim that the Tories were miles ahead and lost it, rather than using the only accurate poll, which was YouGove, which put the Tories only marginally ahead on May 30th and was at odds with the rest of the polls.

The polls proved to be hugely inaccurate in the final analysis and it seems logical to assume they were wrong from the start.

I can only conclude that the Tories were never as popular as was assumed and Labour were as popular at the beginning as they proved at the end.

In other words all the theories about campaigning style and presentation are probably false and are just grist for media analysis based on false premises. 

The tory vote % went up, so to say they were never as popular as we assumed seems a little bit awry. The polls were further out with the Labours, as they ended up with 40% rather than mid 30s or lower. Labour ended up getting a lot more votes than the polls (apart from 1) predicted. Turnout went up and a heck of a lot of new voters were registered to vote, apparently mostly people under 34. These people also apparently voted for Labour and changed things - the polls tended to discount the younger vote due to historical tendency not to actually bother. Corbyn clearly enthused them. And the sign up of all these new voters happened during the campaign, and particularly after the Labour manifesto came out - so I think Labour's popularity increased a whole load, personally. Additionally the other parties votes got split to a degree between tories and Labour - fewer UKIps (obviously) and in many places Lib Dem and Green support went down (obviously in some places as per Xann's post above, Lib Dems or Greens stood down to let others have more of a chance of beating the tory).

I don't know how anyone could fail to notice how terrible the tory campaign was, how the Labour one was miles better, and I suspect that theories it had an impact are spot on, myself. The tory stuff about strong and stable was demonstrated to be utterly, cynically false, for example.

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said:

It offers proof that our system is not as bad as is often assumed because under the German system a party needs at least 5% of the national vote to get seats in parliament.

The Greens could use their votes tactically but still retain their seat and guarantee they can continue to make an important contribution to the political conversation. 

It can be argued that in a system where people know that their vote actually counts, they would be more inclined to vote for the party they most like (least dislike) and that this would allow Greens to get representation above that 5% threshold. It defeats the "why should I vote Green in this Big Party marginal?" question.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

 YouGov (I did smile at YouGove, typo or not!) were also showing double-digit Tory leads at the beginning of the campaign. 

Using a different methodology - the more conventional one. The "hung parliament" one was using a new, experimental method. But otherwise I agree. Just pedantry.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

Do we know yet what the official DUP/tory line will be on whether dinosaurs existed?

Can't see how they'll ever get around to agreeing on the detail of border control or grammar schools or dementia tax when they disagree on dinosaurs.

The dinosaurs thing has been confirmed - evidence of their existence has been found wandering around the house of lords.

[Xela]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

Do we know yet what the official DUP/tory line will be on whether dinosaurs existed?

They exist and they were protestants. 

[MakemineVanilla]

4 minutes ago, blandy said:

The tory vote % went up, so to say they were never as popular as we assumed seems a little bit awry. The polls were further out with the Labours, as they ended up with 40% rather than mid 30s or lower. Labour ended up getting a lot more votes than the polls (apart from 1) predicted. Turnout went up and a heck of a lot of new voters were registered to vote, apparently mostly people under 34. These people also apparently voted for Labour and changed things - the polls tended to discount the younger vote due to historical tendency not to actually bother. Corbyn clearly enthused them. And the sign up of all these new voters happened during the campaign, and particularly after the Labour manifesto came out - so I think Labour's popularity increased a whole load, personally. Additionally the other parties votes got split to a degree between tories and Labour - fewer UKIps (obviously) and in many places Lib Dem and Green support went down (obviously in some places as per Xann's post above, Lib Dems or Greens stood down to let others have more of a chance of beating the tory).

I don't know how anyone could fail to notice how terrible the tory campaign was, how the Labour one was miles better, and I suspect that theories it had an impact are spot on, myself. The tory stuff about strong and stable was demonstrated to be utterly, cynically false, for example.

 

I did notice but I am saying that correlation is not the same as causation.

It may be equally true about Kinnock's defeat in 1992.

It may very well be the case that his triumphalism in Sheffield was not the reason Labour lost and that it was just another instance of the polls getting it entirely wrong.

I am suspicious of the simplistic narrative the media concocts to explain historical events - the established cliched narrative about the political events of the 1970s is a fine example.

I would not deny that the public prefer to concentrate on personalities but it actually doesn't get anyone very far.

I assumed that labour supporters would be more sympathetic to my analysis because I make the case that Labour are more popular than was maintained by the media.

But it looks like I was wrong again.

 

 

 

[Demitri_C]

On 10 June 2017 at 10:03, Chindie said:

He won't be.

Corbyn simply will not change enough old school Tory seats to win.  He possibly could pinch a few more seats from the other parties, perhaps make gains in Scotland if they get their act together up there, and perhaps nick a few Tory seats that are marginal, but there's too many seats that just do not vote Labour and certainly won't vote for Labour lead by someone they view as too left and with too many skeletons (even if the Tory party now has skeletons in open view...). 

He's done spectacularly well, but Corbyn won't ever lead a Labour majority.

I don't see how you can say this. Within a few months he has literally saved labour from oblivion. Meanwhile Theresa may has completely ruined the conservatives.

if there is a election in next 12 months labour are going yo win by a landslide

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I assumed that labour supporters would be more sympathetic to my analysis because I make the case that Labour are more popular than was maintained by the media.

I'm not a Labour "supporter". But even if I was, the information available seems to indicate an increase in Labour support over the period of the election campaign. Yes polling errors, yes other factors such as media bias understating Labour's support maybe....but still, from getting a bit of a shoeing in the local elections, during the period of the campaign to the end result of the national election, their support looks to have gone up.

[Xela]

8 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I don't see how you can say this. Within a few months he has literally saved labour from oblivion. Meanwhile Theresa may has completely ruined the conservatives.

if there is a election in next 12 months labour are going yo win by a landslide

But still won the second highest amount of Tory seats since 1992. And that was after the worst election campaign I can remember from any party! There is a huge amount of conservative support in this country and stick a different, more palatable leader in charge, and amend some of the policies and those 318 seats could easily be increased in a future election. 

Corbyn has done great so far but getting a left leaning Labour government into power is a huge ask. 

[Jon]

13 minutes ago, Xela said:

 stick a different, more palatable leader in charge, and amend some of the policies

Socialist Tory party FTW? 

The Tories have to become more like Jez's Labour to win? My, how times have changed in just a few weeks ... 

Different leader with different policies? Just to get into power.  What's left? They are a party devoid of principles and conviction.  

 

[PompeyVillan]

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

Torygraph:

 

Labour can win another election.

[Chindie]

15 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

I don't see how you can say this. Within a few months he has literally saved labour from oblivion. Meanwhile Theresa may has completely ruined the conservatives.

if there is a election in next 12 months labour are going yo win by a landslide

Corbyn has done very well. I'm glad he has. I hope it continues.

But as I said yesterday and Xela says above, despite having an awful leader running a terrible campaign on a hopeless (literally) manifesto, the Tories grew in vote share.

Unfortunately Theresa hasn't completely ruined the Tories. She's a dead duck prime minister now, but the Tories maintain vast amounts of support and shifting voters from traditional right wing conservatism to a more openly left wing Labour, is an enormous ask. Especially when there's questions about Labour and Brexit. And with the next couple of years potentially being crisis filled.

To win a majority Labour need to win over a lot of Tories. Or they have to devour the SNP, Lib Dems, and capture some Tory seats. That's a huge ask. Lib Dems? Maybe they could pinch some seats there. SNP (and Scottish Tories)? Scottish Labour is a mess. Other Tories? They'll nick a few seats, too many are too tight not to, but the same is true on the other side. And then you have so many places that just do not vote Labour at the best of times.

And bearing in mind the Tories are not going to rush into another election having just been given a bloody nose... They will stabilise themselves, quietly shuffle Theresa off, parachute in a new leader (who might not be one of the obvious choices, none of which are particularly popular, or good) give themselves some time and breathing room, and they'll call a summer election next year. 

Corbyn has to prevent anything stabilising, and pick away at the DUP connection and make it wobble. But he has to do that carefully and he has to do it quickly. People will see through him and Labour playing political games to bring the government down and it will harm them, but he also has to move quickly to maintain the wave of support. And grow it.

All of that is a big ask.

As said I think we're now in a period of hung parliaments because the country is completely divided. Brexit, austerity, things just generally being shit for so many people... Nobody has an answer everyone can get behind to bring about a landslide. Corbyn's best hope is heading a coalition but, failing a complete collapse of the SNP or absolutely enormous growth for Labour/Lib Dems (yeah right on the latter) even that is difficult because ultimately the SNP will have one demand.

[Xela]

4 minutes ago, Jon said:

Socialist Tory party FTW? 

The Tories have to become more like Jez's Labour to win? My, how times have changed in just a few weeks ... 

Different leader with different policies? Just to get into power.  What's left? They are a party devoid of principles and conviction.  

 

Become like Jez's Labour? I don't think i said that. Not big changes. Perhaps just not attack the pensioners and that is all it may take to earn more votes!

Parties changing policies to get into power is nothing new surely? That's what Blair did to get Labour in. 

[blandy]

3 minutes ago, Jon said:

Socialist Tory party FTW? 

The Tories have to become more like Jez's Labour to win? My, how times have changed in just a few weeks ... 

Different leader with different policies? Just to get into power.  What's left? They are a party devoid of principles and conviction.  

It's kind of (mildly) interesting, that when T.May first took over being PM, she talked about governing for the just about managing and all that kind of stuff. And she was popular. She might, or might not, have meant it, but she recognised that if you shaft the majority of the country, you will eventually get shafted yourself. It's always been like that. It always will be. I don't think the UK, or England, is really "all up" for some "hard left" ideology. By and large people want "fairness" in taxes, opportunities, health and education and a decent infrastructure - roads, hospital, police, security...etc. Generally people are not minded to be "nasty" to other people.

What Corbyn has done is basically appeal to that typical Britishness, really. I don't think people are that fussed about nationalising the water companies or whatever. They just don't want high water bills. Same with the trains - if they run well, for a reasonable price and reliably, people don't care who owns them. It's when the "market" distorts or abuses things that people get cross. Same with tax dodgers - people are OK with others doing well if there's an element of merit and fairness in it, but if they think they're getting austerity forced on them and others are getting unmerited handouts....

Somewhere along the way, the tories just got too caught up in, enveloped in, shamefaced greed, economic incompetence, ideological idiocy and treating people with contempt, as you say losing sight of principles and convictions. I know they've always been horrible, but they've taken it to new depths, really, and forgotten that they're supposed to run the country for the country, not for themselves and their mates.

I think (probably in a minority of one) that Labour should also avoid economic incompetence and ideological idiocy - half their manifesto borders on showing that they wouldn't. The other half looks good, looks to be along the lines that plenty of people (from whatever party or none) think is "good", or would do if they actually bothered with manifestos and consequences and all that.

 

[PaulC]

 people are making too much out of this Conservative DUP real. its only going to apply to issues like Security and the economy and its not going to hurt the good Friday agreement. 

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, Chindie said:

the Tories maintain vast amounts of support and shifting voters from traditional right wing conservatism to a more openly left wing Labour, is an enormous ask.

Exactly. It's great that Labour has enthused loads of new voters and got others to return to supporting them, but they have to persuade natural tories that they (Labour) won't eff things up, in order to actually get in. Or they have to co-operate with other parties and work together to defeat the tories. I'm not sure they're currently doing that. Maybe the tories will make such a massive mess of things that they'll get handed power due to tory incompetence - it does look a bit like that might happen, but I still think Labour has a hell of a long way to go to look like a credible Government in waiting.

[blandy]

5 minutes ago, PaulC said:

its not going to hurt the good Friday agreement. 

It will, it has to.

 

[TrentVilla]

5 minutes ago, PaulC said:

 people are making too much out of this Conservative DUP real. its only going to apply to issues like Security and the economy and its not going to hurt the good Friday agreement. 

No of course not...