Support NeoGAF

[tomtom94]

If you mean literal 'coalitions' and are not including C&S deals, then I don't you'll see anything but Con/Lib or Lab/Lib.

And unless the SNP get about half the seats they are predicted and those seats are matched by the Lib Dems also losing far fewer seats than they expect then I highly doubt you'll see the Lib Dems involved in a coalition at all.

 

[Par Score]

So what are the likely coalitions?

My guess,
Cons/Lib Dem
Lab/SNP

For the first, the numbers don't add up. For the second, the politics don't add up.

Unless some dramatic shifts happen between the current polls and election day, about the most stable government we can hope for is a Labour minority backed up by some hodgepodge of the Lib Dems / SNP / Plaid Cymru / Greens / SDLP / Alliance on a vote-by-vote basis.

Fuck knows how long that would hang together, but it wont be a long-term coalition-style deal.

 

[Faddy]

The lib dems won't have a pot topiss in after the election. It is possible they will be in single figures for MPs. There is barely a safe Lib Dems seat in the country with the Tories wiping them out in the South West and losing every Scottish seat, Orkney and Shetland apart.

 

[nib95]

Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8 secs9 seconds ago
#BBCdebate snap poll (Survation):
Miliband - 35%
Sturgeon - 31%
Farage - 27%
Bennett - 5%
Wood - 2%

Ed you sly dog. Also, genuinely shaking my head at the percentage of Farage support.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

The lib dems won't have a pot topiss in after the election. It is possible they will be in single figures for MPs. There is barely a safe Lib Dems seat in the country with the Tories wiping them out in the South West and losing every Scottish seat, Orkney and Shetland apart.

I'm in the South West. Have a local Lib Dem MP, voted Lib Dem last time.

I wrote to my him a couple of months ago (when he voted against protections for whistle blowers in the OSA) and he never wrote back! I got all excited when I got a letter on Tuesday from his office, but it was just general canvassing bumf >:-( Now I'm doubly not-voting for him, for getting my hopes up like that.

Probably not going to vote Tory, but I'm not surprised that LDs are losing seats.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

And unless the SNP get about half the seats they are predicted and those seats are matched by the Lib Dems also losing far fewer seats than they expect then I highly doubt you'll see the Lib Dems involved in a coalition at all.

I'm less sure about this. A Lab/SNP C&S deal only works if both parties have perfect party discipline; neither can have more than one or two votes go missing before it all falls apart. I think Labour might go into coalition with the Lib Dems and form a C&S deal with the SNP at the same time if it means more stability. Depends very much on Sheffield Hallam, which is probably the single most important constituency this election, followed by South Thanet and East Renfrewshire.

 

[FortuneFaded]

The Hislop Vs Prescott argument just on Have I Got News For You is great. I recommend watching.

 

[phisheep]

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

...? Hell would freeze over before that happened.

 

[Sir_Crocodile]

Man, hislop and prescott just despise each other

#teamhislop

 

[Yen]

.@SamCoatesTimes:
Scottish Labour release a statement about the latest dire Ashcroft polls.
“There is no gloss that can be put on these polls."

 

[Uzzy]

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

Short of the Russian 'little green men' suddenly appearing in Warsaw, Berlin, Paris and London at the same time, that's not going to even be considered.

In other news, I missed a hustings that my local candidates were invited to. Last minute babysitting duties are always fun. Shame really, I wanted to know if I could really vote for the Labour candidate. But my vote here doesn't really matter anyway. Gotta love safe seats.

 

[King_Moc]

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

Would be another election. That can't happen.

 

[Rodhull]

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

Well it'd certainly be one way to guarantee Labour would not get back in power in Scotland for a long time. Scottish Labour would have to separate from the UK party to have any chance of surviving short term.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Well it'd certainly be one way to guarantee Labour would not get back in power in Scotland for a long time. Scottish Labour would have to separate from the UK party to have any chance of surviving short term.

Why's that? I mean, most of the people campaigning for independence up there were people who would be in this new Scottish Labour party, and it's not like the UK Labour Party were unpopular before 2014.

 

[Rodhull]

Why's that? I mean, most of the people campaigning for independence up there were people who would be in this new Scottish Labour party, and it's not like the UK Labour Party were unpopular before 2014.

Well up here Labours campaign has been pretty much 'Vote SNP get Tories' so if they ended up joining with the Tories it's hard to see how that wouldn't be seen as anything but a betrayal by the core Labour vote that had remained loyal to them.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Well up here Labours campaign has been pretty much 'Vote SNP get Tories' so if they ended up joining with the Tories it's hard to see how that wouldn't be seen as anything but a betrayal by the core Labour vote that had remained loyal to them.

Sure, I agree, but I think that'd be a betrayal attributed to any hastily-created Scottish Labour as much as the Westminster party given it'd be made up of all the same people. I imagine that any such coalition would destroy Labour irrevocably, irrespective of any new Scottish parties created.

Oddly I think the Tories would fare better, just .Bit of a pyrrhic victory, that one.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

Phi, I love you man. Me and my wife are going to come visit you in Weston. But that ain't going to happen!

 

[industrian]

Ed you sly dog. Also, genuinely shaking my head at the percentage of Farage support.

There's a core element of people that will agree with him just because he's saying what he's saying.

Just as there's a core element of Scots who will agree with anything that amounts to "fuck the Tories".

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

We already had a Conservative/Labour coalition. It was ten years ago when Tony Blair went to war in Iraq and then followed that up Terrorism Acts and <x> days detention without charge legislation.

In seriousness though, I could see a Conservative/Labour coalition arising through two situations:

1) A government of national unity if the Russians decide to get messy with the EU.
2) If the SNP win almost every seat in Scotland and a coalition of this grandeur is seen as a "preventative measure" to "ensure the union."

Situation 2 is the dictionary's definition of backfire though. Labour would be dead and buried in Scotland due to their "Vote SNP get the Tories" rhetoric and the flashbacks to seeing Tories and Labour celebrating the No vote together. It would ensure a second independence referendum if the SNP got another Holyrood majority in 2016 (which they would). And with the lies and propaganda against independence largely exposed in 2014 reinforced by a mindset that Scots (and our votes) are now in some way to be feared, I would give that a 60-40 for independence.

 

[phisheep]

In seriousness though, I could see a Conservative/Labour coalition arising through two situations:

1) A government of national unity if the Russians decide to get messy with the EU.
2) If the SNP win almost every seat in Scotland and a coalition of this grandeur is seen as a "preventative measure" to "ensure the union."

Maybe there's a third situation - if UKIP take something like 100 seats.

 

[kitch9]

Just to take the speculation to extremes - I guess that if the various fringe parties gain enough seats it isn't entirely out of the question for there to be a Conservative/Labour coalition. Now that one would be interesting.

OK, back as you were...

If that were the case there may as well be a coalition between all the parties!

 

[industrian]

Maybe there's a third situation - if UKIP take something like 100 seats.

That's a doomsday scenario if I ever heard one!

If UKIP take 100 seats then I would envision it making the Tories weaker than Labour, potentially opening the door for a minority Labour government to stroll into Westminster.

In this situation I couldn't see the Tories enter into a coalition with Labour because it would destroy them. I mean that literally. As in, the Tories would cease to exist.

1) 100 UKIP seats would indicate that the Tory support base has been totally fractured.
2) By joining Labour the Tories would be by far the junior partner.
3) Being seen as "propping up Labour" would anger the remaining Tory support base. UKIP would light their smoke signals and finish the job of recruiting eurosceptics and hard right-wingers remaining in the Tory party.
4) If enough of these Tory MPs resigned, it could possibly bring down the government.
5) Snap election results in a Labour majority with UKIP having more seats than the Tories.
6) Labour absorbs the moderate elements of the remaining Tory party.
7) England becomes Scotland in being a Labour heartland, using a "it's us or UKIP" and "we can't afford independence leaving the EU" as their only slogans.

 

[EmiPrime]

I think UKIP would be very lucky to get 10 seats. 100 seats I leave the country and don't look back.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

2) If the SNP win almost every seat in Scotland and a coalition of this grandeur is seen as a "preventative measure" to "ensure the union."

This will never happen. The SNP having 56 seats isn't enough for them to do shit, they'd still be four times smaller than whoever was larger from Lab or Con. Lab and Con would just work together on bills solely related to secession and then hate each other as normal on everything else.

UKIP won't even win 10 seats. Even the most ambitious predictions don't put them above 5.

 

[Meadows]

UKIP will win 15 seats max

 

[Par Score]

UKIP will win 15 seats max

What a bold prediction.

I still expect them to have less MPs after the election than they had before it.

 

[industrian]

This will never happen. The SNP having 56 seats isn't enough for them to do shit, they'd still be four times smaller than whoever was larger from Lab or Con. Lab and Con would just work together on bills solely related to secession and then hate each other as normal on everything else.

I didn't say anything about the SNP being able to dictate policy. Because even my dog knows that Scottish votes are totally powerless when it comes to that.

A "preventative measure" to "ensure the union" - notice the quotes - basically would mean that they're trying to send a message that if Labour/Tory could work together, then so could Scotland and England. It's an equally unlikely response to an equally unlikely situation.

UKIP won't even win 10 seats. Even the most ambitious predictions don't put them above 5.

I see them possibly getting less than 5. Simply because their main target audience are Conservative voters, and they're too smart to split the vote and let Labour/Lib Dems creep to victory in their constituency. European and council elections will be the only area where UKIP can succeed, because god knows no-one gives a shit about those.

 

[Goodlife]

1, maybe 2 seats

 

[phisheep]

Ed promising to ban unpaid internships if they're longer than a month. A far bigger deal than lowering than university fees in my opinion. I know so many people who've had to do horrible, months long unpaid internships just for the opportunity to maybe have the opportunity to get a paying job. I think after being undecided about whether to vote Liberal or Labour, my vote is now to going to Ed. He's proving himself to be far less of a damp squib than he has been in the past.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/17/labour-pledges-four-week-limit-unpaid-internships

I'm really not sure how he could ban internships without accidentally banning all forms of volunteering, which cause major problems for, say, Oxfam - who rely on something like 24,000 volunteers. Not to mention the many small businesses that do likewise.

 

[industrian]

I'm really not sure how he could ban internships without accidentally banning all forms of volunteering, which cause major problems for, say, Oxfam - who rely on something like 24,000 volunteers. Not to mention the many small businesses that do likewise.

In the case of Oxfam, they could probably just close all of their stores and it wouldn't make that much of a difference. IIRC less than 10% of the total sum that they spend on “charitable expenditures” comes from their stores.

 

[Ding-Ding]

For the first, the numbers don't add up. For the second, the politics don't add up.

Unless some dramatic shifts happen between the current polls and election day, about the most stable government we can hope for is a Labour minority backed up by some hodgepodge of the Lib Dems / SNP / Plaid Cymru / Greens / SDLP / Alliance on a vote-by-vote basis.

Fuck knows how long that would hang together, but it wont be a long-term coalition-style deal.

What you just described would not be a stable government, it would be a government that would get fuck all done as too many parties pulling in different directions (especially on economics).

It would probably fold soon after the 1st budget. Then its another GE (which Labour cant afford)

The most stable would be either a con/lib or lab/lib. Only question is will either have enough seats to be able to achieve that.

 

[Meadows]

I think they'll win 4, but in the best case scenario I can see them getting 15.

 

[EmiPrime]

If Farage doesn't win in Thanet then surely UKIP are done if he makes good on his promise to resign. They're not going to survive that.

 

[phisheep]

In the case of Oxfam, they could probably just close all of their stores and it wouldn't make that much of a difference. IIRC less than 10% of the total sum that they spend on “charitable expenditures” comes from their stores.

It's more like a third - about 88m of 260m.

 

[industrian]

If Farage doesn't win in Thanet then surely UKIP are done if he makes good on his promise to resign. They're not going to survive that.

Farage is UKIP. If he leaves then UKIP won't survive the infighting to replace him.

For all of the cult of personality that surrounded Alex Salmond - and the mediocre performance of Swinney that made Salmond return - he groomed a capable successor in Sturgeon. Farage, like with most political leaders, don't groom successors. Because that succession normally arrives in the form of a knife in the back.

It's more like a third - about 88m of 260m.

From what I remember that 80+m figure is before administration costs (rent, logistics, etc) of the stores is factored in. But I doubt it matters. I'm sure there's separate legislation (or at worst, a loophole) that will exclude volunteers from this unpaid internship thing.

 

[Faddy]

I'm really not sure how he could ban internships without accidentally banning all forms of volunteering, which cause major problems for, say, Oxfam - who rely on something like 24,000 volunteers. Not to mention the many small businesses that do likewise.

Is your business a registered charity? No, then you can't disguise employees as volunteers. There are loads of other rules too that distinguish a volunteer from an employee.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Farage is UKIP. If he leaves then UKIP won't survive the infighting to replace him.

For all of the cult of personality that surrounded Alex Salmond - and the mediocre performance of Swinney that made Salmond return - he groomed a capable successor in Sturgeon. Farage, like with most political leaders, don't groom successors. Because that succession normally arrives in the form of a knife in the back.

I don't think is true. Farage could quite easily be replaced by Carswell, who a) will definitely win his seat, and b) is probably actually better than Farage as a political operator anyway. 10% of the electorate are going to vote UKIP; more than the entire population of Scotland. That doesn't go away overnight.

 

[Par Score]

What you just described would not be a stable government, it would be a government that would get fuck all done as too many parties pulling in different directions (especially on economics).

I didn't say it would be stable, I said it would be "the most stable government we can hope for" based on current polling, because:

The most stable would be either a con/lib or lab/lib. Only question is will either have enough seats to be able to achieve that.

Based on current polling, neither of these options get even close to a majority.

Con/Lib would get shot down by the nascent "Progressive Alliance".

Lab/Lib would get shot down by the Tories, their NI friends, and a vengeful SNP who would justify it with some argle-bargle about legitimacy.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I don't think the SNP would vote down Labour in a confidence vote if they thought the Conservatives would win. It just doesn't look good for them.

 

[phisheep]

Is your business a registered charity? No, then you can't disguise employees as volunteers. There are loads of other rules too that distinguish a volunteer from an employee.

Oh yes you can (not that I do though). And I'm not sure registered charities are in a privileged position here either.

 

[TheOnlyOneHeEverFeared]

I'm registered for my postal vote democracy etc.

 

[kmag]

Opinium

Conservative 36 n/c
Labour 32 -2
Liberal Democrats 8 +1
UKIP 13 +2
Green 5 -1
SNP 4 n/c
BNP 0 n/c
Plaid Cymru 1 +1
Other 1 n/c

Clear Tory lead in Opinium/Observer. There's three more polls out tonight.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Interesting that the UKIP +2 comes along with a Labour -2 and Tory no change.

I'm writing this in my phone and that first word came out as "inbreeding".

 

[Ding-Ding]

I didn't say it would be stable, I said it would be "the most stable government we can hope for" based on current polling, because:



Based on current polling, neither of these options get even close to a majority.

Con/Lib would get shot down by the nascent "Progressive Alliance".

Lab/Lib would get shot down by the Tories, their NI friends, and a vengeful SNP who would justify it with some argle-bargle about legitimacy.

You are looking at the polls too literally. The truth of the matter is its very unlikely any of the parties outside cons/lab/lib/snp will get anything more than 5 mp's each (if that).

Also from what I have been told, Milibands recent statements about no deal with the SNP is actually correct. Apparently, he is being squeezed hard from the New Labour mob. They see any deal with the SNP, who will try to push Labour left in any negotiation, as a recipe for middle England to send you into opposition for well over a decade come 2020. They will not risk that under any circumstances.

Regardless, I am pretty sure that if Miliband somehow gets his foot into no.10 now, it wont be a very long stay

 

[pulsemyne]

Opinium

Conservative 36 n/c
Labour 32 -2
Liberal Democrats 8 +1
UKIP 13 +2
Green 5 -1
SNP 4 n/c
BNP 0 n/c
Plaid Cymru 1 +1
Other 1 n/c

Clear Tory lead in Opinium/Observer. There's three more polls out tonight.

Bet the others will be even. Anyway opiniums previous poll has a bit high for the tories so maybe there's something off with their weightings.

 

[kmag]

Bet the others will be even. Anyway opiniums previous poll has a bit high for the tories so maybe there's something off with their weightings.

They're even in the sense the polls are still coalescing around the 34% mark for each party.

YouGov for Sunday Times
Lab 36%
Con 33%
Ukip 13%
Lib Dem 8%
Green 5%

Leader net approval
Cameron 0
Miliband -18
Clegg -36

I was mistaken the only other poll out tonight is ICM's wisdom index but that's not a proper VI poll.

 

[Audioboxer]

Isn't the point though that they won't fire the missile as they'd be dead as well?

Not necessarily, you're assuming that another nuclear state would return fire on our behalf. That is not a sure thing in every scenario. What if the other states decided that since we were already destroyed, and the aggressor couldn't attack them without facing destruction anyway, they may as well follow a policy of appeasement or isolation rather than global armageddon?

Retaining a nuclear deterrent all but ensures that nuclear weapons can't be used against us. Relying on others to defend us is an altogether more risky proposition, especially when our conventional forces (and most of Europe's) have been chronically underfunded for decades.

During the debates, it's pointed out how many European countries do not have nuclear weapons.

It's a dick waving contest, and many including myself feel the way to try and live in a world with some amount of peace is not by harbouring nuclear weapons. Show we're a peaceful country that doesn't need such horrendous weapons of mass destruction. Nicola isn't saying rid ourselves of defences but scrap the colossal amount spent on trident and spend the majority of it on the people (health/public services/education/trade), and a portion of it towards more traditional defences.

It's pretty simple, if a nuke is fired at the UK we're all dead. A good part of the world would be ruined really. There's no coming out of a nuclear war, if the world starts one, the world is over. Lets improve our lives we actually live, and not some dream of fear that the UK will get blown up.

Basically, why continue living through the colossal debt and terrible lives of poverty some live just so we can say our dick is big, we have nuclear, don't threaten us? It's no surprise to me the three women see this easily, and it's the two guys saying we need trident.

It's not a small majority either, a lot of Scottish people do not want trident and frequently rally/voice against it. If those in Westminster want their nuclear weapons so badly, then take them and put them somewhere down south.

edit: This is a good video to watch of Nicola - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMiFKfe-eTY
edit2: Nicola back in 2009 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJJ1U0F1g9c

 

[RedShift]

I'm not sure on nuclear weapons. I definitely agree that rationally there's no point ever using them, but... I don't know, I'm pretty sure Russia wouldn't be fucking with Ukraine like they are if they still had nukes. They might ultimately be a bluff but there's no one who's going to call that bluff.

That said I don't think spending £100+ billion on them is worth it. I'd probably rather scrap Trident and keep some slightly less effective but cheaper nukes if that was possible.

 

[pulsemyne]

I'm not sure on nuclear weapons. I definitely agree that rationally there's no point ever using them, but... I don't know, I'm pretty sure Russia wouldn't be fucking with Ukraine like they are if they still had nukes. They might ultimately be a bluff but there's no one who's going to call that bluff.

That said I don't think spending £100+ billion on them is worth it. I'd probably rather scrap Trident and keep some slightly less effective but cheaper nukes if that was possible.

It certain is, in fact if we went with an air lauched deterrent from F35's then it's a much more flexible option and a crapload cheaper.

 

[MGL]

Nuclear weapons aren't to be used. It's for deterrent.