|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: UK General Election June 8th 2017
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Are there [technically] any official candidates at present? Has anyone actually filed the appropropriate paper work to say they are standing for election in constituency x? If not then technically a call from Mr Blair to support someone opposed to Brexit is not a call to vote against an official Labour candidate. Which may be a technicality, but may be an important one - especially if his intent is to get the Labour party to field candidates opposed to Brexit.
The nature of a snap election is that there is very limited time to select candidates, so the chances of any party selecting someone other than the current MP/person who they put up last time is slim - except in cases where that person has said they don't want to stand. That time scale is even shorter for smaller parties who won't realistically be able to start that process until after the 4th May elections are over, since (quite reasonably) they'll be concentrating their limited resource on those elections. Which is another reason why the timing of this general election sucks - though it suits Mrs May because it makes sure it's in before she loses her Commons majority as Tory MPs get charged with election expense violations.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I'd guess that legally there are no candidates until the acting returning officer publishes the list of those who have properly been registered in each constituency.
That said, Blair is sailing close to the wind on this. But then, once again, the only thing Blair is interested in is Blair.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
The registration deadline is 11th May for the general election. All major parties seem to have gone for sitting MPs being automatically selected unless they wish to stand down.
I would imagine that major parties will be able to rustle up candidates quite easily, as they've probably always got someone "on standby", particularly in target seats. For the ones they have on the "we'll never win" list, I guess it doesn't matter too much.
But with the polls the way they are, maybe that list is very different this time around.
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Goode
Shipmate
# 9224
|
Posted
"Tony Blair" is an anagram of "Libya torn".
Posts: 654 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I'd guess that legally there are no candidates until the acting returning officer publishes the list of those who have properly been registered in each constituency.
IIRC parties name someone as their provisional parliamentary candidate: amongst other things it avoids the problem that public servants have to resign their office before they can stand for parliament.
[ 24. April 2017, 11:24: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by David Goode:
"Tony Blair" is an anagram of "Libya torn".
Or, among others, "Tory in Lab" and (I like this) "Rainy Blot".
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
No-one can be sure of anything. There is no 'Right or Wrong' in Politics, - all there is are 'Opinions' on what might be a better course of events. I avoid any Politician who knows for certain what is 'Good or Bad'. Humility is absolutely essential for someone in Authority to avoid making catastrophic errors.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
No-one can be sure of anything. There is no 'Right or Wrong' in Politics, - all there is are 'Opinions' on what might be a better course of events. I avoid any Politician who knows for certain what is 'Good or Bad'. Humility is absolutely essential for someone in Authority to avoid making catastrophic errors.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Humility is in short supply. And catastrophic errors abound.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, I can't imagine a politician who is truly humble. I know that some put on an act of humility, but it tends to be paper-thin. They polish their image, and lie out of their back teeth.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
Probably a tangent for another thread, but is humility really compatible with such enormous responsibility? It might be in church settings, but in politics you have to climb the greasy pole in the first place, and if you do become PM have some pretty awe inspiring decisions to take.
You walk through the door of number ten and have to write a document explaining what the nuclear submarines have to do if they lose contact with Britain. There might be a war.
Is humility really to be expected? I think to get there, you'd have to have such monumental self belief and probably a pretty mean streak...
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
And probably cognitive dissonance?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
Probably a tangent for another thread, but is humility really compatible with such enormous responsibility?
Yes, I think so. President Carter's name sort of leaps to mind in this context - and I think you can admire his humility without necessarily admiring either his policies or his presidency.
Whether it's also compatible with the demands of getting elected in the soundbite-driven 24-hour media cycle that makes up modern politics, I don't know.
But it's an interesting challenge - any kind of leadership position requires a fair amount of self-confidence: if you're not confident in your own abilities, why would anyone else be? But someone who is secure in his abilities doesn't have a problem admitting that someone else's idea is a better one.
People who blow their own trumpet generally don't have anyone else to blow it for them.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
A very good point by Leorning Cniht. You can be humble while also being strong and authentic, and in fact, it's the weak-minded who tend to be shrill, and poor listeners.
I don't know enough about Carter, but it's hard to think of a British politician like this. People say that Attlee was, but I don't know. There are plenty of cynical ones, who are good at manipulating, e.g. Wilson.
As Ms West is supposed to have said, a hard man is good to find.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
There are plenty of cynical ones, who are good at manipulating, e.g. Wilson.
I might add Baldwin to the list - gave away something like 20% of his fortune to help pay off the WW1 war debt without telling anyone he'd done it - I can't imagine any of the current crop doing the equivalent now, and certainly not doing it without any publicity. He certainly manipulated his own image, a la Wilson, but he was decent with it - just finished Roy Jenkins' biography of him as it happens.
Maybe also Sir Alec Douglas Home, who just took the job on the basis of noblesse oblige.
Away from the leaders there are and have always been a good few more on the backbenches (on both sides) but even there one always gets the impression that the majority of backbenchers have a burning belief that they could do the top job.
Then there're those who get humility thrust upon them - John Profumo is the model for this - devoted decades post the titular scandal to quiet (and very effective) charity work. You could say this was an attempt to rebuild his reputation but even then he quietly got on with it all without publicity, so I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt there.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
I might add Baldwin to the list - gave away something like 20% of his fortune to help pay off the WW1 war debt without telling anyone he'd done it
He was also one of the "Guilty Men", so...
quote:
Then there're those who get humility thrust upon them - John Profumo is the model for this - devoted decades post the titular scandal to quiet (and very effective) charity work. You could say this was an attempt to rebuild his reputation but even then he quietly got on with it all without publicity, so I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt there.
It isn't as clear as that, with charity and celebrity. Publicity for them equals publicity, and therefore donations, to the charity. But suspicion as to their motive. Prince has been lauded for his private support for charity, but how much more help would those charities have received if his devoted fans had known?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Then there're those who get humility thrust upon them - John Profumo is the model for this - devoted decades post the titular scandal to quiet (and very effective) charity work. You could say this was an attempt to rebuild his reputation ..
In which he succeeded to a degree. From the Davenport-Hines book on the era he seems to emerge chastened rather than particularly changed.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
I think that a little bit of Humility might have prevented the second Iraq War.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Then there're those who get humility thrust upon them - John Profumo is the model for this - devoted decades post the titular scandal to quiet (and very effective) charity work. You could say this was an attempt to rebuild his reputation but even then he quietly got on with it all without publicity, so I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt there.
It isn't as clear as that, with charity and celebrity. Publicity for them equals publicity, and therefore donations, to the charity. But suspicion as to their motive. Prince has been lauded for his private support for charity, but how much more help would those charities have received if his devoted fans had known?
I'm quite prepared to have a good go at defending Baldwin, although I suspect this isn't the thread!
I agree with your point on celebrity/charity, but the point on Profumo (which is why mentioned him) was that he really does seem to have been on an atonement kick - working away quietly behind the scenes on unfashionable causes. His periodic appearances blinking into the limelight were more notable for the fact most people were surprised he was still alive
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
My Favourite Politician was Arthur Neville Chamberlain, a Conservative politician who served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from May 1937 to May 1940. He was the one who got Britain ready for a War he didn't want, and then declared War on Germany on 3rd September 1939. He then led the Country at War until he was too ill to carry on, and died shortly afterwards of Bowel Cancer. A Man of Peace, who because of his efforts, united the Country against Hitler.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
YouGov has just published a poll, showing the Tories 10 points ahead of Labour IN WALES. This would give them 10 former Labour seats, and an overall majority of seats in Wales. This is through-the-looking-glass politics.
Most Welsh polling data is based on subsets from UK-wide polls, and is therefore not very reliable. But this was specifically commissioned by ITV Wales.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
YouGov has just published a poll, showing the Tories 10 points ahead of Labour IN WALES. This would give them 10 former Labour seats, and an overall majority of seats in Wales. This is through-the-looking-glass politics.
Most Welsh polling data is based on subsets from UK-wide polls, and is therefore not very reliable. But this was specifically commissioned by ITV Wales.
Labour certainly has an instinct for suicide. I feel sorry for the poor and the disabled, who are going to get shafted, well, shafted again.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
How?
Your earlier post talks of increasing divisions between the various constituents of the UK; this proposal gives greater emphasis to separate traditions.
That's why I think it's important that it's all 4 [Bank holidays] everywhere. It's celebrating all the parts together. A United Kingdom.
Is it (to consider Scotland) too little too late, probably, but it might give a terms grace and in that term something good could happen.
Will it counter the SNP narrative portraying Labour as enabling the Tories, probably not, but it might prevent it from being increased.
Will it counter the Tory narrative portraying Labour as enabling the SNP, probably not, but it might prevent it from being increased.
Will it be praised by the press, almost certainly (in 2 years time, in Teresa's campaign for a mandate to rejoin the EU, but you didn't ask about details).
[ 24. April 2017, 17:12: Message edited by: Jay-Emm ]
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
It would appear that all across the UK the Tories are getting back most of the voters they lost to UKIP, without losing too many Tory Remainers to the Lib Dems. Leave voters from Labour and Plaid Cymru are also contemplating the unthinkable.
I'm starting to wonder if there's still a "shy Tory" effect: I know of Brexit supporters who have never voted Tory before who will admit, when pressed, that they are thinking of doing just that. Whether they would say so to a pollster is another matter; it's entirely possible that Tory support is actually understated.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
It would appear that all across the UK the Tories are getting back most of the voters they lost to UKIP, without losing too many Tory Remainers to the Lib Dems. Leave voters from Labour and Plaid Cymru are also contemplating the unthinkable.
I'm starting to wonder if there's still a "shy Tory" effect: I know of Brexit supporters who have never voted Tory before who will admit, when pressed, that they are thinking of doing just that. Whether they would say so to a pollster is another matter; it's entirely possible that Tory support is actually understated.
Well, Labour seem incoherent on Brexit, and just about everything else. Admittedly, the Tories are also incoherent, and have made more U-turns than an anaconda. However, this seems irrelevant, since politics isn't based on rational stuff today. Mrs May has a good image, even if it is a fraud.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Clint Boggis
Shipmate
# 633
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by beatmenace:
quote:
Originally posted by Clint Boggis:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
I'm an outsider but from what I've heard Blair say on other occasions it seems he wants to do anything he can to stop Brexit or make it as soft as possible - and he is encouraging people to vote for whatever candidate in their district seems most likely to make that happen, regardless of party. Or am I getting him all wrong?
No, you're quite right - I heard him say exactly that on BBC R4 this morning.
Is that then blatantly encouraging someone to vote against an official Labour candidate?
I thought you could be expelled from the party for doing that.
When pressed on whether he was suggesting people should vote against a Labour-Brexit candidate he said they should vote Labour. I'm sure he's aware he's giving conflicting advice.
Posts: 1505 | From: south coast | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
Meanwhile Fallon has declared that we could do a first nuclear strike, because that attitudes worked so well for Kim
(actually to be fair it has, once locked in that position, but it's not as good as being in the South Korean position)
[ 24. April 2017, 20:58: Message edited by: Jay-Emm ]
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
For those who want extra depression, here is a website and blog with an involved discussion of polls. The consensus, even amongst Scottish Nationalist contributors is that the Tory surge in Scotland is here to stay: it represents a coalescing of Unionist support behind - well - the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party. Even in places like Glasgow, Tory support is now upwards of 20% apparently, for the first time in 30 or 40 years. I am told this is partly due to the popularity of Ruth Davidson but also residual Orange support, which was only ever 'lent' to Labour.
The most recent Scottish poll(Panelbase) is SNP 44, C 33, Lab 13, LD 5). On a uniform swing, the SNP would remain dominant but the Tories would gain all the Border constituencies, half the Scottish north-east: 12 constituencies in all. They would also come from third, leapfrogging the SNP in the process, to take Edinburgh South and eliminate Labour representation in Scotland.
The Lib Dems would hang onto Orkney and Shetland, and would miss out on East Dunbartonshire by a squeak (actually I suspect they'll gain it as their candidate is said to be popular).
Just think. No Labour representation in Scotland. What a change from 1997. I am dismayed.
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
Why has Tory support gone up and Labour support gone down since the Brexit referendum? Is it all from UKIP voters switching to the Tories now that UKIP's raison d'etre is gone and Labour leave voters also switching to the Tories? Where are all the remain voters and the majority in polls who favor a soft Brexit? Are the Tory policies other than Brexit so popular among them? Do so many of them think giving May a stronger majority will result in a soft Brexit? Do they trust their local Tory MP to fight for a soft Brexit? It just seems odd to me as an outsider that there isn't more of a backlash against the Tories in the areas where the remain vote was high.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
I think one has to look back to the 2015 election and compare it to the election before that to answer this question.
Compared to 2010, the Tories' vote remained static, the Labour vote declined, the Lib Dem vote collapsed, and UKIP's vote multiplied. The reason the Tories made gains is because of Lib Dem collapse in seats where the Tories [edited] came second in 2010.
In 2014 Yougov did a survey of UKIP support. Just under half had voted Tory in 2010. Ten percent hadn't voted. The remainder had voted Lib Dem, UKIP or Labour.
So, the following happened in 2015:
- The Tories lost votes to UKIP.
- Labour lost a similar number of votes to the Tories.
- Lib Dem support switched to Labour, stayed at home, or switched to UKIP.
All of which suggests that 2010 Tories who voted UKIP in 2015 are now returning to the Tories. In the meantime, Labour has not regained the support lost to the Tories in 2015.
None of this accounts for geographical spread, and it will be interesting to see how well Tory support holds up in London. However, Brexit may not have much effect. Most Labour voters voted Remain. Most Tories voted Leave. The Remain vote in the south of England mostly came from non-Tories.
[ 25. April 2017, 02:31: Message edited by: Cod ]
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
None of this accounts for geographical spread, and it will be interesting to see how well Tory support holds up in London. However, Brexit may not have much effect. Most Labour voters voted Remain. Most Tories voted Leave. The Remain vote in the south of England mostly came from non-Tories.
In addition and related. Labour seem to have ended up blamed by both sides of Brexit (as I was worried about at the time).
Partly because the tories are good at spin.
Partly because like all good lies, it's partially true.
Partly because the elements in labours internal arguments have been very blind to what they've been saying (more actively the anti-corbyn side [think of what Blairs just said, and how it will be heard by a Brexiter and a Remainer], more passively Corbyn).
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
But also, it seems, that there are swing voters who want to make sure Brexit actually happens.
There are some truly remarkable comments on this thread on UK Polling Report.
quote:
I’ll tell you the reality of how this is panning-out in the real world.
I am 60 years old. I am a member of Plaid Cymru and I go out campaigning for them etc etc and have been for the forth-coming council elections. I consider myself a traditional working class left-wing pro-welsh independence republican.
I have never, ever, in my entire life ever even considered voting Tory.
However, just this once I will be lending Theresa May my vote in June. BREXIT is far far bigger than party idealogies. We have gt to get on with it and we have got to be seen as having a strong pro-BREXIT government in power.
And I know I’m not the only one that’s doing likewise. I know Plaid and Labour councillors, Plaid members and Plaid and Labour voters that will, in the secrecy of the booth, be putting their cross against the tory candidate. I even know some Lib Dems that will be doing likewise.
Personally, I think the level of Tory support is understated.
Leanne Wood doesn’t seem to have any idea what’s going on in her pwn grass roots support and I would be very very surprised if Plaid increased it’s seats.
OK, it's the Internet, but I can't imagine anyone bothering to make such a comment before. It wouldn't even be half-convincing trolling.
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
Another snippet for polling anoraks.
This article discusses how 2010 Lib Dem voters intended to vote. The article is prior to the last GE, but it's probably accurate as the Lib Dems did end up with the vote share projected in that survey.
Labour: 26%
Lib Dems: 25%
Conservative: 8-9%
UKIP: 9 - 11%
Green: 5 - 8%
Not voting: 2%
Don't know: 21%
If the DKs are split proportionally on the basis of those expressing a preference, we have roughly one third indicating that they'd vote Lib Dem, which is exactly what happened at the 2015 election.
Interesting to note the proportion of votes heading to UKIP, who are the opposite of the Lib Dems on many issues.
My speculation is that those LD-to-UKIP voters have now headed across from UKIP to the Tories and won't be got back by the Lib Dems.
I also suspect that voters who switched from the Lib Dems to Labour in 2015 are sticking with Labour, however, their numbers aren't enough to offset the loss of support from Labour to the Tories.
It all emphasises what a huge shift to the right there was in England in 2015.
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
I've never really believed before that people would switch from Labour to Tory (or vice-versa) in significant numbers. The occasional chronically undecided or capricious type might do it. Large-scale movement between parties is usually in the form of "churn" - Tory to Liberal, Liberal to Labour, Labour to SNP/PC/Green.
This time around I know lifelong Labour voters, people who would previously have sent Tory canvassers away with some ripe invective, who are considering voting Tory. Not just because they want to "make sure of Brexit"; there are also those who can't stand Corbyn and don't want him in power under any circumstances (they have little to worry about!); Theresa May also seems very popular personally, for reasons unfathomable to me. There is a growing sense that there is only one horse in this race so you might as well back it.
The Tories' core vote is holding up well, they have hoovered up most of the UKIP vote, and they are gaining Leave voters from other parties. It's easy to see why May was suddenly persuaded of the merits of a snap election.
I think the only way Corbyn can stop the haemorrhage is by coming out strongly for Brexit, saying "I wanted it all along but the pesky plp tied my hands" It might be too late, smacking of desperation, but it would at least have the virtue of honesty. It would finally sever all links with the bulk of the Labour party, which may be what he wants. He needs a populist insurgency, but at the moment we seem to have an establishment insurgency.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
stonespring: quote:
Why has Tory support gone up and Labour support gone down since the Brexit referendum?
I think the short answer is 'because the Tories have the right-wing press on their side'. The most widely read newspapers are the Sun and the Daily Heil, both rabidly pro-Brexit. The slightly longer answer is 'because the Armageddon that the Remain campaign predicted hasn't happened yet' (well of course it hasn't: we're still in the EU at the moment, and when we leave the Brexiteers can blame any problems on EU sabotage or "Remoaners").
There are quite a lot of people out there still who don't use the Internet, and/or don't rely on it as a news source. Older people for the most part, who are also more likely to vote.
And the Labour Party is also backing Brexit, so if you don't your only choice (if you're not in Scotland) is to support the Lib Dems, who have not really recovered yet from the experience of acting as the emergency brake in the coalition government.
[ 25. April 2017, 08:40: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I simply cannot understand why so many are considering voting Tory. Madness.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
The Tories' core vote is holding up well, they have hoovered up most of the UKIP vote, and they are gaining Leave voters from other parties.
Text book demonstration of much mythed Tory Loyalty in action - looks (at the moment, there's still plenty of time for all this to change) like if you're a Tory voter then that's more important than anything else, including your personal position on Brexit, so you'll be voting Tory.
At the same time:
- leavers in other parties are intending to vote Tory this time round to prop up Brexit
-unionists in Scotland are coalescing around the Tories because unionism is more important than Brexit and they want to kick the SNP
- God only knows what's happening in Wales although it looks like a straight transfer of leave voters to the Tories, combined with a verdict on the performance of Labour in the Welsh Assembly (no one ever said voters had to be rational)
- the pragmatic end of the Remain vote everywhere looks at the choices for PM and doesn't want Corbyn
- lots of people do seem to like Mrs May
*If* this is the way it goes in 6 weeks' time then, regardless of political affiliation, the Tories will in the short term have played a political blinder.
Personally, I think that they're storing up problems for themselves longer term, but then again I suppose they're also buying the time to head them off...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
betjemaniac: quote:
*If* this is the way it goes in 6 weeks' time then, regardless of political affiliation, the Tories will in the short term have played a political blinder.
And this is what those of us who don't support them find so annoying; it's all a game to them, and their only aim is to hold onto power for as long as possible. This is true of many politicians, but the current Conservative Party has taken it to new levels (or perhaps we should say depths).
[ 25. April 2017, 08:54: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
betjemaniac: quote:
*If* this is the way it goes in 6 weeks' time then, regardless of political affiliation, the Tories will in the short term have played a political blinder.
And this is what those of us who don't support them find so annoying; it's all a game to them, and their only aim is to hold onto power for as long as possible. This is true of many politicians, but the current Conservative Party has taken it to new levels (or perhaps we should say depths).
absolutely agree - but even as someone that's more sanguine about the Tories I do think they're storing up problems for themselves. Lets assume a massive majority for the purposes of what I'm about to say (I'm actually open to anything from a hung parliament to a majority of 200+ still at the moment):
- they'll win loads of seats in places that they shouldn't, some by quite tight margins; these will start to swing back post Brexit
- they'll conversely lose some seats which they shouldn't, where the Miller/Blair dinner party axis-of-Remain gets going on tactical voting - those might come back at subsequent elections but it will mean campaigning in 2022 gets very cock-eyed
- there will, even in the bluest of blue sky perfect Brexits still be *some* Brexit remorse once it has gone through. I'm agnostic about how much there will be because, as a fence sitter from last year, I'm agnostic about how good/bad it can be - as someone who works in a small business I can see both sunlit uplands and apocalypse round the corner, and everything in between. Nevertheless to some extent there will be a kicking coming for the Brexiteers in the future, and the Tories will now indisputably own it
so, in the short term they might be weighing rather than counting the national vote, longer term it could absolutely blow up in their faces.
On the plus side for Labour, if they're reduced to a rump then they'll probably escape the fallout in five years time of any bad Brexit.
That is, if they actually come up with someone electable next time round. If Jeremy stays on until he can get is leadership election changes through then, as Nick Cohen says in Sunday's Observer, there's no reason why we couldn't be exactly where we are now at the next election too...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
If Jeremy stays on until he can get is leadership election changes through then, as Nick Cohen says in Sunday's Observer, there's no reason why we couldn't be exactly where we are now at the next election too...
Anyone who thinks Corbyn will step down just because of an electoral disaster hasn't got the measure of Corbyn. He will stay on as leader until he has firmly established a hard-left dynasty.
Now there are more electable figures than Corbyn on the left of the party, but yes I currently think it is more likely than not that we will be here again in five years' time.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
I currently think it is more likely than not that we will be here again in five years' time.
As someone who has never voted Labour* but nevertheless believes in halfway decent oppositions to keep government honest you've no idea how much that depresses me.
*I have however voted for 3 other parties so I'm not overly partisan
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
stonespring: quote:
Why has Tory support gone up and Labour support gone down since the Brexit referendum?
I think the short answer is 'because the Tories have the right-wing press on their side'.
To be precise, 80% of the press in this country is owned by six aging white right-wing male oligarchs.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
It is utter madness to vote Tory in Wales. Absolutely stupid.
I can understand dismay amongst Labour voters given the extremely bad deal that the Cardiff bay assembly works within, the continued grinding poverty experienced in many of the places where the majority of the population of Wales live, the near-collapse of the health system, the way that Labour seem to think that they own/deserve much of the political ground in Wales.
But I simply cannot understand how those things are mutated through a lens of Brexit anti-immigrant feeling (usually in places where there are few migrants) to support for the bloody Tories - who have absolutely nothing to offer Wales whatsoever. Talk about cutting off your foot to spite your face.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
stonespring: quote:
Why has Tory support gone up and Labour support gone down since the Brexit referendum?
I think the short answer is 'because the Tories have the right-wing press on their side'.
To be precise, 80% of the press in this country is owned by six aging white right-wing male oligarchs.
And how many people actually read those papers?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
support for the bloody Tories - who have absolutely nothing to offer Wales whatsoever. Talk about cutting off your foot to spite your face.
I appreciate that at best this will probably provoke gales of hollow laughter from you, but there is a small, rational, reason why *this* time it might work. And I say this because it's a small possibility, not because I endorse it or think it will happen.
*If* the Tories get a big majority, but at the expense of safe seats in Remain areas of the SE, then they might be forced to do more to hold onto such seats over the 5 years and into the next GE. Consequently, as a pragmatic outworking of "better to be inside the tent" mixed with good old fashioned pork barrel politics, Welsh and indeed (and perhaps especially) Scottish seats that go blue could expect to do quite well out of it, if only because of the bonkers times in which we're living.
On that basis, if the Tories end up with a vested interest in Potemkin villages in Scotland and Wales, then it might be worth living in one. And yes, I'm as appalled by the cynicism of that line as you will be, but I think it's a possibility.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
OTOH, the Tories' assertion that only they have "a clear plan for Brexit" has provided some welcome light relief.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garden Hermit
Shipmate
# 109
|
Posted
I am bored with the whole thing. We didn't need an Election. What do we pay MPs for if its not to sort out the nitty-gritty of the Detail. I don't need any Brexit Plan, - just sit down in the Room and get the best deal you can. Easy.
Posts: 1413 | From: Reading UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
And how many people actually read those papers?
If you look at weekly readership figures rather than daily circulation figures, and include both print and online access, then about 12 million people read The Sun each week, and about 13 million read The Mail or The Mail on Sunday.
Additionally, because of the centralisation of the press in the UK, the print press tends to set the agenda for both private and public broadcast media.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Personally I think that very few people are actually committed to any given party (mostly those who actually join a party and get involved). A much larger number of people will habitually vote for just one party, but don't do so out of any strong conviction on the policies of that party - there are irrational reasons like "this is a Labour/Tory area, therefore I'll vote Labour/Tory" (delete as appropriate), there are semi-rational reasons that people expect particular parties to be on their side (former coal miners vote Labour, small business owners vote Tory etc) even though objective analysis of policies would significantly cloud the issues, many people will vote consistently for one party on the basis of a very few policy issues (Labour always does well campaigning on the NHS, Tories on low taxes).
What we're seeing at the moment is basically a major re-assessment of how people vote, creating a much larger pool of swing voters than normal. Part of that is that Brexit is a new factor that has never previously been a major plank of policy for any major party, and one that cuts across most parties (mostly because before last year none of the parties had any need to work through a defined policy on EU membership that the whole party could get behind). While Brexit is held out by the media (and, indeed by our PM) as the main policy question in this election people will actually be looking at what the different parties propose on that issue and that will strongly influence voting behaviour.
But, added to that I do think there is a growing awareness of the range of issues in politics, the one good thing to come out of the referendum campaign last year was that a lot of people who don't usually vote did so, a lot of people who don't normally engage in political discussion did so (even on the very limited data, much of it false, they had to discuss). And, the referendum campaign allowed people to vote on an issue without feeling obliged to simply support the party they habitually voted for. The referendum let the cat out of the bag - you don't need to always vote for the same party just because that's how you've always voted, and that cat isn't going back in the bag (and, a good thing it is too IMO).
The biggest problem with this new-found flexibility in voting is that there is still a strong impression that we're effectively a two-party system. So, habitual Labour voters re-assessing their views are quite likely to overlook the other parties and only see the choice between Labour and Tory (except in Scotland where the SNP have managed to blow the two-party paradigm out of the water). For the smaller parties (primarily the LibDem to an extent, Greens, PC in Wales) to gain significantly from this larger pool of swing voters what they really need to do is to manage to overturn the two-party paradigm, which will involve a lot more than putting forward good candidates and policies. For a start they have the mass media to combat, who are among the strongest proponents of the two-party paradigm, and also the Tories and Labour (both of whom benefit from the two-party paradigm), and all others portraying a vote for anyone else as "wasted".
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
