General Election Pre-Thread (3 of 6)

[The Fun Factory]

15 hours ago, bickster said:

It’s all shaping up rather nicely I think and the LibDem increase is kind of a week earlier than I thought it would be. I’m really hoping it shows up in other polling released over the next few hours and days

Lib dem vote usually goes up during general elections as they get very little coverage between elections, apart from the 2015 disaster when they were actually in government and got burned by it. They have been steadily building up councillors in the last few local elections.

[bickster]

1 hour ago, The Fun Factory said:

Lib dem vote usually goes up during general elections as they get very little coverage between elections, apart from the 2015 disaster when they were actually in government and got burned by it. They have been steadily building up councillors in the last few local elections.

Agreed. I've said for months that they are under represented in the polling or should I say under represented compared to what their final tally will be. In fact that YouGov/Sky  poll puts them at where I imagined they'd be by polling day, so if that continues across polling then they may even be higher.

Whilst the Tory and Labour Parties have been extremely shy in talking about the EU, its a huge elephant in the room and the LibDems have called it out. There is a significant proportion of the middle classes that are remainers and the LibDems just gave them a damn good reason to give them their vote in this election.

[The Fun Factory]

5 minutes ago, bickster said:

Agreed. I've said for months that they are under represented in the polling or should I say under represented compared to what their final tally will be. In fact that YouGov/Sky  poll puts them at where I imagined they'd be by polling day, so if that continues across polling then they may even be higher.

Whilst the Tory and Labour Parties have been extremely shy in saying is about the EU, its a huge elephant in the room and the LibDems have called it out. There is a significant proportion of the middle classes that are remainers and the LibDems just gave them a damn good reason to give them their vote in this election.

They actually had an increase from 2017 to 2019 of a couple of percent. Still, they did an idiotic campaign last time promising a  European referendum up and down the country and not focusing on a few dozen marginals. Swinson was inexperienced and lost her seat and job, Davey is a more wily campaigner and I think they have gone back to basics this campaign. I think they could get close to 15% which isn't far off what they got in '97.

Edited June 12 by The Fun Factory

[Mandy Lifeboats]

Just a quick question for PR supporters. 

Under FPTP I have an MP who is directly responsible for my home area. He has a vested interest in helping me and my neighbours because we voted for him and might do so again in the future. 

Under PR how do you maintain that local accountability?  How does PR ensue every community has a "go to" MP?

 

[bickster]

Somebody started a topic for PR a couple of weeks ago here Can we use that to continue this discussion please. Ta!

[ml1dch]

11 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

They actually had an increase from 2017 to 2019 of a couple of percent. Still, they did an idiotic campaign last time promising a  European referendum up and down the country and not focusing on a few dozen marginals. Swinson was inexperienced and lost her seat and job, Davey is a more wily campaigner and I think they have gone back to basics this campaign. I think they could get close to 15% which isn't far off what they got in '97.

There are some interesting parallels between 2017 / 2019 and 2019 / 2024.

For the accepted narrative of May's terrible campaign in 2017, of the 2.66m new Tory voters that were added across the 2017 and 2019 elections she added 2.34m (nearly 90%) of them in 2017. Just to lose thirteen seats.

That's double the number of new Tory votes that Cameron got in 2010 over Howard in 2005 to become Prime Minister. It's just that Corbyn added even more in 2017. What May did do was take away tens of thousands of votes from constituencies that Johnson then had a tap-in for in 2019.

Jo Swinson / Ed Davey (to bring it round to your point in bold) will be the May / Johnson of the above. There were four times as many new Lib Dem voters from 2017/19 as there were new Tory voters from 2017/19 (1.3m vs 300k). For all the horror of Swinson's disastrous 2019 campaign, those switchers in 2019 are going to be Ed Davey's version of Johnson's Red Wall in 2024. Tory majorities going from 20,000 to 3,000 in 2019 means they're screwed in 2024, just like those Labour seats from 2017 - 2019. May did the hard work, Johnson took the glory. Davey's 30 / 40 gains aren't going to have quite the same political impact, but the principle is the same.

Edited June 12 by ml1dch

[bickster]

 

[bickster]

 

[bickster]

Hilarious, following her meltdown the other day...

[Davkaus]

Nevermind promoting Farage and a matter for party discipline, it looks to me like another case for the electoral commission and the police.

No mention of the Conservative party, and another party's leader at the top of your leaflet? To me that looks a lot like deliberately misleading voters into thinking she represents Reform.

[Davkaus]

All kinds of fun in the green party manifesto

Quote

Most of the world’s countries do not possess weapons of mass destruction and are safer as a result.

We will continue to support Ukraine as it resists Russian invasion.

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

All kinds of fun in the green party manifesto

 

That’s simplistic. I mean how many nations have nukes?  A handful. Are the ones that don’t less secure because they don’t? Are they less secure because others do?

I am not supporting or defending the Green manifesto on this, and it’s possibly less likely Ukraine would have been invaded if it had nukes, but it is also perhaps less likely that the world, or Eastern Europe would have been safer if they had kept their decaying, crumbling nuclear capability.

[Davkaus]

8 minutes ago, blandy said:

That’s simplistic. I mean how many nations have nukes?  A handful. Are the ones that don’t less secure because they don’t? Are they less secure because others do?

I am not supporting or defending the Green manifesto on this, and it’s possibly less likely Ukraine would have been invaded if it had nukes, but it is also perhaps less likely that the world, or Eastern Europe would have been safer if they had kept their decaying, crumbling nuclear capability.

It's fair that my post was a bit of a cheap "gotcha", and it's fair to highlight that Ukraine in the 90s would not have stood much of a chance of maintaining Soviet nuclear weapons to keep them in good working order. I bet they wish they'd had them though. Countries with viable nuclear deterrents do not get invaded.

A few years ago I'd probably have been much more open to a conversation about Trident, but unilaterally disarming in 2024 is not serious policy, with not just what's going on in Europe, but the possibility of another term of Trump dividing NATO

Edited June 12 by Davkaus

[The Fun Factory]

If today's polls are correct 1 in 4 voters could vote either Green or Reform come 4th of July. A few years ago that wouldn't have even been 10%. Shows the fragmentation of voting patterns, yet we continue to have first past the post which massively favours the two main parties.

[ml1dch]

1 hour ago, The Fun Factory said:

If today's polls are correct 1 in 4 voters could vote either Green or Reform come 4th of July. A few years ago that wouldn't have even been 10%. Shows the fragmentation of voting patterns, yet we continue to have first past the post which massively favours the two main parties.

I'd bet all the money in the world that Green + ReFUK is nowhere near 25% of the total vote on July 4th. I reckon somewhere around 15% combined. 

[Stevo985]

I do sometimes wonder if all the people who said they would vote green if it made a difference or if they had a chance of winning their seat actually did vote for them, how many votes they would get

 

There's probably a poll for that somewhere.

They'd probably get my vote

[ml1dch]

7 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I do sometimes wonder if all the people who said they would vote green if it made a difference or if they had a chance of winning their seat actually did vote for them, how many votes they would get

 

There's probably a poll for that somewhere.

They'd probably get my vote

As a counter-point, I wonder how many people would still vote for them if their policies were given the same scrutiny as that given to the Labour and (less-so this time) Tory platform. Parties with no chance of winning tend not to have their crazier ideas examined too closely. 

Edited June 12 by ml1dch

[Davkaus]

21 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

As a counter-point, I wonder how many people would still vote for them if their policies were given the same scrutiny as that given to the Labour and (less-so this time) Tory platform. Parties with no chance of winning tend not to have their crazier ideas examined too closely. 

Absolutely, the interview their co leader gave on lbc the other day would have absolutely ended the campaign of a Labour leader

[Stevo985]

23 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

As a counter-point, I wonder how many people would still vote for them if their policies were given the same scrutiny as that given to the Labour and (less-so this time) Tory platform. Parties with no chance of winning tend not to have their crazier ideas examined too closely. 

Yep it’s a fair point

[bickster]

Oh no, what terrible timing…