It's probably not too far off, maybe a little high for Libs but the general feeling amongst all forecasters is that it is about 5 or 6 seats either way between cons and lab.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
May 7th | UK General Election 2015 OT - Please go vote!
- Thread starter Volotaire
- Start date
- Status
It's probably not too far off, maybe a little high for Libs but the general feeling amongst all forecasters is that it is about 5 or 6 seats either way between cons and lab.
Spaced Harrier
Member
How different your MPs would be had you a fair system of election..
Miles Quaritch
Member
But we might have had an Elvis impersonator elected.
Think about the shame! The laughing stock it would make us around the world!
Spaced Harrier
Member
Stereogatari
Banned
My local MP is going to be Boris Johnson.
I'm already dead aren't I.
I'm already dead aren't I.
anonymous_abc
Member
Unlikely. None of the minor parties will be big enough to get a formal agreement from either the Conservatives or Labour, unlike with the Lib Dems last time, and even if the minor parties were able to form a massive "give us a PR referendum or we vote with the opposition" bloc, I suspect that would just result in the dissolution of parliament.
In other news, the Tory candidate standing against Alan Johnson has defected to UKIP. It's been a Labour safe seat for years (and the closest party last time out were the Lib Dems) so I can't see that doing much for UKIP's chances, but it might rattle Cameron a bit.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
We won't see calls for PR, no. The SNP are actually the biggest winners under FPTP: they'll get about 3.4% of the vote but about 7.6% of the seats. They'd only be on for 22 seats if we used a PR system. With Labour, and the Conservatives, and the SNP against it, and without the Liberal Democrats holding a king-maker position like we did last time, no chance.
Miles Quaritch
Member
When shit like this was put out last time?
http://blog.eclecticmemes.com/2011/04/14/av-referendum-no-vote-leaflet/
http://mippr.co.uk/clients/case-study-no-to-av-campaign/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/d...-turnout-still-swing-it-for-the-yes-campaign/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13260010
There's no hope for AV/PR. It's a dead duck in the UK because the established parties were able to convince people that FPTP is an acceptable way for politics to work, just like the tories were able to successfully fool people into thinking the country's debt is the same as paying a mortgage.
Reduce your argument to be as simple as possible and people will blindly agree with it because it 'makes sense'
Well we had this guy:
A true man of the people.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I can't tell if that is supposed to be satirical and whether the "Vote no-one" is deliberate or whether that guy is just thick as a plank.
Chemical Rampancy
Banned
Another defection to UKIP, and people still believe Cameron is the stronger leader than Milliband.
killer_clank
Member
Despite being big winners out of FPTP in this election if things hold, I'm pretty sure the SNP are against FPTP. They've been under represented at westminster for decades because of it, and one of the major moments in the SNP's history was forming a mass parliamentary group in 1999, only possible because of the proportional voting system, creating the basis for them to form a government 8 years later.
Quite. SNP are long term thinkers. FPTP is a short-term political ambition; move between Tories and Labour and both sides get a go, but having to share at the same time? Less politically beneficial for the British Career politician.
Plus the SNP know with PR its possible to get quite astonishing support anyway; it also benefits smaller English parties - something key for their power if they are to remain in the UK [what some in the rUK and Scottish Unionist camp do not yet realise is the SNP have broadly accepted the No result last year and are now targeting influencing the UK to achieve their members ambitions for the country - for many in the SNP independence was a means more than a goal].
SNP should begin to introduce the idea through Westminster, not push hard but introduce it. Issue with the AV ref is it was a bad voting system and a rushed vote; in the end AV is just FPTP and worsens the two party system.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
They may have been in the past. However, given just how poor Scottish Labour are, and I think we can all agree the revival will be a slow tortuous process, I would not be surprised if FPTP favoured the SNP for at least the next two decades. There's no incentive to get rid of that, not when it is (as it is now) near to a 30-seat bonus. Labour consistently backed electoral reform through-out the entirety of the first half of the 20th century, but once the bonus starts favouring you, suddenly that decision becomes a lot more difficult.
Building a progressive alliance is great and all, but the SNP would literally be giving up 60% of their seats to do so. They don't like the small English parties that much.
Sure, from the Tory candidate standing in Hull West and Hessle. But he was sacked on Friday apparently, so it's not technically a defection. Either way, he wasn't going to win anything before, and he's certainly not going to win anything now.
He can't even stand for parliament anymore because UKIP a have already chosen who will lose for them in that constituency, so apparently he's standing for the council.
So yeah not exactly a big name defection, but still not great for the Tories.
Guerrillas in the Mist
Member
When shit like this was put out last time?
http://blog.eclecticmemes.com/2011/04/14/av-referendum-no-vote-leaflet/
http://mippr.co.uk/clients/case-study-no-to-av-campaign/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/d...-turnout-still-swing-it-for-the-yes-campaign/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13260010
There's no hope for AV/PR. It's a dead duck in the UK because the established parties were able to convince people that FPTP is an acceptable way for politics to work, just like the tories were able to successfully fool people into thinking the country's debt is the same as paying a mortgage.
Reduce your argument to be as simple as possible and people will blindly agree with it because it 'makes sense'
The fact that nobody from the No campaign was seriously reprimanded for any of the flat-out lies they put out during the campaign was infuriating. The Tories sent it out to die and pissed on its body to make a point to the LDs.
Chemical Rampancy
Banned
Given the likelihood of a hung parliament, conservatives should now bear in mind that vote for them is a vote for UKIP.
Except the traditional working class voter moving to UKIP is not the Labour voter but the Tory voter. Splitting their vote. Theres a reason the Tories are going on about the SNP; its working on the doorstep with voters thinking of going UKIP.
Theres also the clear truth that a vote for UKIP is NOT a vote for the Tory party; quite the opposite, its a vote for another party with different supporters and policies.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
De facto, though, any vote which isn't a vote for a party that has a chance of winning helps the policy objectives of the most likely party.
Chemical Rampancy
Banned
I think you missed what I said.
Conservative voters are voting for a party willing to form a coalition with UKIP. Given that a hung parliament looks inevitable at this stage, a vote for either party is a vote for the other.
But UKIP a will be lucky to retain the number of seats they have now after the election, let alone gain enough to give the Tories a majority. The Tories only way to stay at number ten is another Con-dem coalition, which practically rules out working with UKIP anyway.
Even as Labour supporter/voter I find the prospect of a UKIP/Tory coalition extremely unlikely.
I must have missed Cameron saying he was open for a coalition with UKIP. The only thing I've heard is Gove and Shapps ruling it out. Farage might have said he thinks Cameron is 'someone we can sit down and talk with', but I don't really put stock in what Farage says.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
UKIP will not be in government. They're going to be exceptionally lucky if they win 3 seats. The odds that 3 seats puts them in a kingmaker position are tiny. If the Conservatives get back into government as a result of this election, it will be as the result of a Con/LD coalition. There is no other way. A Con minority without LD support would not get anything done, they would have to do a second election in October.
EDIT: Which is why it would be hilarious if those six Conservative backbenchers did actually defect as a result.
EDIT: Which is why it would be hilarious if those six Conservative backbenchers did actually defect as a result.
CyclopsRock
Member
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32194270
Another day, another cum-swilling Ukip capture of a Tory reject. Why are UKIP so proud of this nonsense?
Anyway, as the Crabster says, I think the only alternative to a ConLib coalition is a Tory minority, given their war chest. But I dunno, that assumes that Labour dont have the numbers for a working majority or a supply and confidence minority of their own. For that to be the case, you would need just the right numbers whereby Labour didn't get too many, the Tories got enough but not too many but the Lib Dems also didn't get that many.
Another day, another cum-swilling Ukip capture of a Tory reject. Why are UKIP so proud of this nonsense?
Anyway, as the Crabster says, I think the only alternative to a ConLib coalition is a Tory minority, given their war chest. But I dunno, that assumes that Labour dont have the numbers for a working majority or a supply and confidence minority of their own. For that to be the case, you would need just the right numbers whereby Labour didn't get too many, the Tories got enough but not too many but the Lib Dems also didn't get that many.
cameron probably has zero appetite for a coalition with UKIP, he was quite wary of pandering to his nutcase back benchers' causes even before the last election where i'm sure he was confident in a majority, so i doubt he'd align himself with a party that has a tremendous amount in common with the parts of the conservative party he's trying to suppress.
CyclopsRock
Member
Also worth noting that any Lib Dem - Labour coalition would require a bit of a bloodbath at the top of the Lib Dems. That's gonna happen at some point, but I'm not sure the Lib Dems slightly natty leadership system could work quickly enough for the sake of achieving a coalition agreement with Labour. For this reason, I think it'll require something really special for a LD/Labour coalition. So we have a big and small party in the red corner and a big and small party in the blue corner. How exciting!
Edit: I adore the Spectator and detest the commentators on their website.
Edit: I adore the Spectator and detest the commentators on their website.
Miles Quaritch
Member
He might not like it, but if they make enough gains to allow them to not enter a coalition again with the LD, I could see them aligning themselves with UKIP.
There's a reason a number of Tory MPs didn't rule it out.
CyclopsRock
Member
Hmmm, I dunno. The Lib Dems would then essentially be electing a deputy PM. It could happen but I think it's unlikely. I don't think it would only be Clegg that would have to go.
Tim Farron would negotiate as party lead, and atm I'd be willing to put money on him getting the job in the end anyways.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I actually think Lab/Lib Dem coalition is pretty likely if Clegg gets unseated. I mean, put it this way: the SNP will probably stick to voting only on bills that affect Scotland. While this is most bills (anything that involves finance), there are a number of bills that they will probably abstain on - e.g., a crime bill that doesn't involve financing. If Labour can't rely on the Lib Dems, and the Conservatives have even one or two seats more, than Labour can't pass any England-only bills.
That would be disastrous for Ed Miliband's authority and even more disastrous for the Labour party in the long-run because the Conservatives could get so much leverage out of that. Labour will want to make sure that they have an English majority bloc in the same way they want a UK majority bloc. I think the Liberal Democrats will demand coalition in return for that, if Clegg is gone. IMO the two most important seats in the country for this election are Sheffield Hallam and South Thanet. Whether Clegg or Farage win or not has huge consequences.
That would be disastrous for Ed Miliband's authority and even more disastrous for the Labour party in the long-run because the Conservatives could get so much leverage out of that. Labour will want to make sure that they have an English majority bloc in the same way they want a UK majority bloc. I think the Liberal Democrats will demand coalition in return for that, if Clegg is gone. IMO the two most important seats in the country for this election are Sheffield Hallam and South Thanet. Whether Clegg or Farage win or not has huge consequences.
it'll be a total nightmare and he probably knows it. UKIP's constant public relations blundering stink will probably rub off and make it a government of sleaze at best and genuine prejudice at worst, and by effectively giving a far right party a platform and power, it could generate a unified left that could put the tories out of government for over ten years again.
That'd be outright disgusting if they did. Would truly pin the Conservative party as a spineless, tactless and completely detestable sham.
Chemical Rampancy
Banned
So how many seats are needed to form a government again?
If two coalitions are possible, does the one with the most seats get into power?
If two coalitions are possible, does the one with the most seats get into power?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Number of seats depends, really. If we assume that every single MP except Sinn Fein would vote in a Confidence Motion on either one side or the other (not necessarily accurate), and that there will be 5 Sinn Fein MPs, then you need 322 people to vote for you to stay in government (because the Speaker always vote with the government in the event of a tie). This doesn't necessarily mean in coalition, it could be in a confidence and supply arrangement where another party won't bring your government down but won't join you officially - Labour and the Liberal Democrats had one of these in the late '70s, and the SNP are offering one to Labour this election.
The Prime Minister gets the first opportunity to form a government. If Cameron thinks he can survive a Confidence Motion, he will submit a government to Her Maj. If he either choses not to submit a government, or loses a Confidence Motion after submitting, then there's no established order but given there is only one other party will be large enough to be Prime Ministerial, it'd be Miliband's turn in reality. If Miliband also choses not to submit a government, or also loses a Confidence Motion after submitting, then there is a second election.
I would expect parties to vote something like this:
Conservatives: For Cameron.
UKIP: For Cameron.
UUP: For Cameron.
Liberal Democrats: Depends. Probably for whoever they think would be most stable in return for getting into government as a coalition.
DUP: Depends. Probably for whoever they think would be most stable in return for policy concessions.
Sinn Fein: Abstain.
SDLP: For Miliband or Abstain.
Alliance: For Miliband or Abstain.
George Galloway: For Miliband or Abstain.
Lady Sylvia Hermon: For Miliband or Abstain.
Labour: For Miliband.
SNP: For Miliband.
Plaid Cymru: For Miliband.
Green: For Miliband.
For the Conservatives to form government, at a minimum, they need UKIP+DUP+UUP+LD+CON to be at least 320, which assumes all the potential abstainers abstain and everyone who could side with them does.
industrian
will gently cradle you as time slowly ticks away.
Which would last for precisely three weeks before UKIP threw their toys out of the pram.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
To be honest, Con/LD and Con backbenchers will be throwing their toys out of the pram.
Alliance have distanced themselves from the Lib Dems since they went into coalition, iirc they don't even invite the LDs to their conferences anyway (and that was probably the only genuine link they had before). Long sat on the opposition bench and if she's re-elected (big "if") I'd guess she'd favour Labour.
Even the anti-DUP parties, TUV and Progressive Unionist Party (*cough* UVF) are stepping aside for the DUP in east Belfast. Protect the Union at all costs, eh.
All Unionist parties are Unionist, but some are more Unionist than others.
Alliance want to move away from sectarian, identity politics. DUP/UUP/TUV/PUP don't.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Aiesh, Northern Ireland is so dysfunctional. How can you possibly care about unionism/separatism for that long, it's baffling.
CyclopsRock
Member
Yeah, I dunno. I'd also expect Farron to win a leadership election but the Lib Dems are so weirdly democratic for a party that I'm not sure where Farron would get his authority from to negotiate. His role atm is more akin to what Shapps is for the Tories - a political prankster stiring up trouble on radio 4 and stirring up campaigners at dinners. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can see a lot od LDs having a problem with someone who isn't their leader negotiating them into another 5 years of voting for things they don't like (even if a LD party without the Orange Bookers are more naturally inclined towards labour).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked