The Theresa May General Election thread (edited)

Jalapeno

Underestimate Conservative grass roots organisation at your peril - the blue rinse brigade are ready and able !!!!!!

Heartfeltdawn

Jalapeno said:

Underestimate Conservative grass roots organisation at your peril - the blue rinse brigade are ready and able !!!!!!

I never would. Spent a year working very closely with them in a Conservative county. 

Alas, the person who seems to have underestimated them the most is their party leader. 

Fretwired

Jalapeno said:

Underestimate Conservative grass roots organisation at your peril - the blue rinse brigade are ready and able !!!!!!

You mean people like my mum. Local treasurer for many years she (and a bunch of other activists) had lunch with Thatcher and she has met May a number of times when she was Home Secretary and her analysis of her doesn't make for good reading. May has lost her vote over the 'Dementia tax' and lack of credible polices. The funny thing is she likes some of Corbyn's policies - increased police, NHS spending, abolishing Uni fees but would never vote for him. At the local elections she voted Lib Dem and might at the GE.

The problem is May needs traditional Labour voters to turn her way along with some Kippers. Corbyn can win on a much lower share of the vote. The voting system is weighted in Labour's favour.

capo4th

Where are all the fretboard silent conservative voters? 

Jalapeno

Fretwired said:

 The voting system is weighted in Labour's favour.

Pre-SNP that was true, Labour took the 50+ seats from Scotland for granted. Today I'd say if anything it's the opposite.

Heartfeltdawn

capo4th said:

Where are all the fretboard silent conservative voters? 

Posting at TGP

Snap

capo4th said:

Where are all the fretboard silent conservative voters? 

mate, musos are lefties!

I'm voting Liberal, as its a straight choice between them and Labour here. But, even if it was a 3 horse race I don't know if I'd vote Tory, even though there are a lot of their policies I agree with (and plenty I don't).

I don't think I would ever vote Labour unless they changed their attitude to taxation, and unless they were able to present a cogent and costed fiscal plan.

and changed almost the whole of their shadow cabinet. Today's choice for Berk of the Day? Emily Thornberry. What a div.

Fretwired

Jalapeno said:

Fretwired said:

 The voting system is weighted in Labour's favour.

Pre-SNP that was true, Labour took the 50+ seats from Scotland for granted. Today I'd say if anything it's the opposite.

Labour constituencies tend to have fewer people, turnout is lower in Labour-held seats, and Labour has traditionally lost fewer seats to third parties. The Labour vote is also more “efficient”. The ideal in our system is “win small, lose big” – the fewer votes spent on crushing victories or narrow defeats, the better the return of seats to votes. Labour’s vote is closer to this ideal – fewer mega-majorities, and a better record of wins in tight races.

And with the collapse of UKIP the Tories face four left learning parties who have quietly agreed they could work together. So you could see a coalition Labour government propped up by the other parties. Sturgeon has said she'd do anything to keep the Tories out of Westminster.

Scotland is overrepresented at Westminster but that won't change anytime soon. Sturgeon would love to be the King maker - more money and power for Scotland. May might want to ponder that as a line of attack. A Corbyn/Sturgeon double-act could strike fear into voters.

ICBM

Jalapeno said:

Pre-SNP that was true, Labour took the 50+ seats from Scotland for granted. Today I'd say if anything it's the opposite.

It makes little difference. The SNP will never support the Tories - both for traditional reasons and because they are now the direct enemy in Scotland - but could possibly support a minority Labour government, even though a coalition is out of the question.

I can't even see that as scaring people - Corbyn knows full well that Sturgeon will never support May, so he'd call her bluff and block another referendum, leaving Sturgeon with an awkward choice of whether to agree to work with Labour or to fume and look impotent.

breakstuff

My local Conservative candidate.

Jo Gideon.

Born in Birmingham,lives in Kent,stood on the Thanet District Council for twelve years.
Unsuccessfully contested the Scunthorpe seat in 2015.

Naturally the obvious choice to stand in the strictly Labour stronghold of,wait for it.....


Great Grimsby,of course!!!!


That'll go down REALLY well.


Look like,although saying I'd never vote Labour again after the Blair/Brown years,I think Melanie Onn will be getting my cross come election day.

Fretwired

Jalapeno said:

Fretwired said:

 The voting system is weighted in Labour's favour.

Pre-SNP that was true, Labour took the 50+ seats from Scotland for granted. Today I'd say if anything it's the opposite.

This is from January 2017 but it explains the voting arithmetic better than I could ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38499645

johnnyurq

Fretwired said:

Jalapeno said:

Fretwired said:

 The voting system is weighted in Labour's favour.

Pre-SNP that was true, Labour took the 50+ seats from Scotland for granted. Today I'd say if anything it's the opposite.

Labour constituencies tend to have fewer people, turnout is lower in Labour-held seats, and Labour has traditionally lost fewer seats to third parties. The Labour vote is also more “efficient”. The ideal in our system is “win small, lose big” – the fewer votes spent on crushing victories or narrow defeats, the better the return of seats to votes. Labour’s vote is closer to this ideal – fewer mega-majorities, and a better record of wins in tight races.

And with the collapse of UKIP the Tories face four left learning parties who have quietly agreed they could work together. So you could see a coalition Labour government propped up by the other parties. Sturgeon has said she'd do anything to keep the Tories out of Westminster.

Scotland is overrepresented at Westminster but that won't change anytime soon. Sturgeon would love to be the King maker - more money and power for Scotland. May might want to ponder that as a line of attack. A Corbyn/Sturgeon double-act could strike fear into voters.

How so?

Scottish population makes up just shy of 10% of the UK total population according to most wisdom, as it stands we have just a shade over 9% of the Westminster MPs.

Seems about right to me.

I also think once again you are overegging what 59 out of 650 can do in terms of being Kingmaker as you put it. It would need to be fairly tight for it to come into play UK wide.

It is fair to say others have demonstrated in similar threads the amount of times Scotland has determined the outcome are few and far between. Again it needs it to be tight between the main big two parties for it to matter. Maybe it could their fault for not being able to convince the voting populous that either party are worthy of a majority.

Personally I would prefer  to see a coalition of more than just Labour or Tory plus one other party to make the numbers up in some hastily put together deal.

Jalapeno

Fretwired said:

Jalapeno said:

Fretwired said:

 The voting system is weighted in Labour's favour.

Pre-SNP that was true, Labour took the 50+ seats from Scotland for granted. Today I'd say if anything it's the opposite.

This is from January 2017 but it explains the voting arithmetic better than I could ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38499645

Hmmm interesting. Even that piece acknowledges the whupping Labour got from SNP. It conveniently ignores UKIP effect though, which has all but collapsed.

Fretwired

Jalapeno said:

Fretwired said:

Jalapeno said:

Fretwired said:

 The voting system is weighted in Labour's favour.

Pre-SNP that was true, Labour took the 50+ seats from Scotland for granted. Today I'd say if anything it's the opposite.

This is from January 2017 but it explains the voting arithmetic better than I could ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38499645

Hmmm interesting. Even that piece acknowledges the whupping Labour got from SNP. It conveniently ignores UKIP effect though, which has all but collapsed.

It was written in January .. UKIP collapse has been more recent.

Fretwired

johnnyurq said:

How so?

Scottish population makes up just shy of 10% of the UK total population according to most wisdom, as it stands we have just a shade over 9% of the Westminster MPs.

Seems about right to me.

I also think once again you are overegging what 59 out of 650 can do in terms of being Kingmaker as you put it. It would need to be fairly tight for it to come into play UK wide.

It is fair to say others have demonstrated in similar threads the amount of times Scotland has determined the outcome are few and far between. Again it needs it to be tight between the main big two parties for it to matter. Maybe it could their fault for not being able to convince the voting populous that either party are worthy of a majority.

Personally I would prefer  to see a coalition of more than just Labour or Tory plus one other party to make the numbers up in some hastily put together deal.

Don't shoot the messenger. Those words belong to Professor John Curtice, of Strathclyde University. "Scotland is, in fact, still over-represented in this House," Prof Curtice told the House of Commons Justice Committee in 2007.

I think the election could be tight. In 2010 we had a coalition - in 2015 the Tories scrapped in and this time you could have the two major parties deadlocked. I doubt the Lib Dems will recover so it could be the SNP which steps into the void. It could create a constitutional crisis with English voters getting upset that Scottish MPs vote on English only matters.

May could scrap through but I think its only a matter of time before we get another coalition. The day of big majorities has gone.

Jalapeno

Long way to go yet (anyone remember the "War of Jenifer's ear" ?), many's a wossname twixt cup and lip etc

Or that Kinnock's victory" party .... all together now "Thiiiings can only get betterrrrrr"

Fretwired

Jalapeno said:

Long way to go yet (anyone remember the "War of Jenifer's ear" ?), many's a wossname twixt cup and lip etc

Or that Kinnock's victory" party .... all together now "Thiiiings can only get betterrrrrr"

Agreed ... Corbyn may yet be sabotaged by the Blairites ...

ToneControl

on 6th May 2015, the polls said 34% tory, 33% labour
we all know that people pretend they are not tory

However, some think that the current polls showing a 10% to 20% lead for the tories is hopeful sign for Jezza?

johnnyurq

Fretwired said:

Don't shoot the messenger. Those words belong to Professor John Curtice, of Strathclyde University. "Scotland is, in fact, still over-represented in this House," Prof Curtice told the House of Commons Justice Committee in 2007.

I think the election could be tight. In 2010 we had a coalition - in 2015 the Tories scrapped in and this time you could have the two major parties deadlocked. I doubt the Lib Dems will recover so it could be the SNP which steps into the void. It could create a constitutional crisis with English voters getting upset that Scottish MPs vote on English only matters.

May could scrap through but I think its only a matter of time before we get another coalition. The day of big majorities has gone.

Well you were the one posting it and went on to say that will not change anytime soon. Mining a   2007 bit of info dude come on! In any case the figures were as near as the same then as now as dammit.

I think the numbers speak for themselves really and not much room for creative interpretation.

This has been said and by you a few times now in similar threads yet  you choose  to bandy it about once more.  I just wonder why really.

It possibly could come down to SNP being  in and about any coalition  but I think is more likely that the Lib Dems will easily have more than even the whole 59 Scots MPs this tome round making your scenario a rank outsider. The Lib Dems certainly up our way had a bit of a recovery despite us having had Danny Alexander in harness until the last election and I think they will do better than most think they will overall.

We have already seen in councils here since the Council elections Deals have been done to exclude teh SNP mainly instigated by a very poor 3rd or 4th Tory council members. Happened here as well as Aberdeen and other places. All our councils ended with no overall control and like here Indpendents were approached to do backroom deals despite in many cases the SNP being the largest body or runners up numbers wise.

Now if that is happening here do you really think that if SNP got even a sniff of any influence at all the other parties would close ranks sharpish as how it has happened pretty much all over Scotland.

As I say the SNP's reach and power outside Scotland is greatly exaggerated for politcal reasons I think.

In any case if they did hold the balance and come out as the 3rd party (again doubtful) they would be excluded tout suite by the other 3 main parties. But surely like any other UK party finding themselves in the same position they have the democratic right to support or enter into coalition with whomever they see fit to. Not many here liked the Lib Dem choice and we had to live with it, in hindsight it is better than what we have now though I will say.

The SNP were apparently going to swing the last election and the EU ref too, wasn't even close to it for either case. yet teh papers were full of the FUD and doom.

As for coalitions I hope they become the norm in the future and I apply that to Holyrood also, polticians who get carte blanche tend to get go down one dogmatic path and we have seen how that ends up in the last 4 decades (at least) of flip flopping between Labour and Tory. Niether scenario has been close to being a good thing.

Regarding the highlighted part again this keeps coming up and yes it is regretable when it has happened and not many I know support it happening if it doesn't affect Scotland in any meaningful way. 

In nearly all cass that did happen it was Scottish Labour obeying 3 line whips doing it. In any case it would harm them here if SNP went down that road of interfering in Englad only votes.

Also I reckon that both  the so called West Lothian and Offa's Dyke questions could easily be sorted by both Labour and Conservatives when in power but for some reason there is no will to do so but yet lots of outrage. Could it be that it is a convenient bogeyman when they need to deflect from their BS!?

Fretwired

ToneControl said:

on 6th May 2015, the polls said 34% tory, 33% labour
we all know that people pretend they are not tory

However, some think that the current polls showing a 10% to 20% lead for the tories is hopeful sign for Jezza?

When May was 24% ahead of Labour the pollsters were seeing great swathes of the Labour heartlands turning blue. When asked people liked some of the policy ideas but not Corbyn. When Labour's manifesto was launched people liked more of the polices but still didn't like him, however the polls narrowed. There was then the NHS hack - Corbyn went on the attack and showed some spine claiming it was down to the fact the Tories failed to renew a £5 million contract with Microsoft. The polls narrowed - Labour were on safe ground.

May launches the Tory manifesto with the 'Dementia tax' and all hell breaks loose. The polls narrow to the point she has to do a U-turn. She tries to say there's no change in policy, which is a lie and the polls narrow some more.

Voters are seeing May in a different light - she's maybe not a safe pair of hands. Corbyn has managed to remain composed and, from what I've read, Labour voters are warming to him. Let's see the next set of polls. We don't know what effect the dreadful bombing in Manchester will have and whether police cuts might come home to haunt May.