-
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.
UK General Election - 8th June 2017 |OT| - The Red Wedding
- Thread starter Jezbollah
- Start date
- Status
As well as this, theoretically you could have 48.2% of of the national vote on something and not have it matt...oh wait
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
As well as this, theoretically you could have 48.2% of of the national vote on something and not have it matt...oh wait
At least in this example, that's because 51.8% of the country really did vote the other way, which is fair. When voting for Parliament, it's not because the rest of the country votes the other way, it's because of the voting system itself.
haha, yeah was only joshing around.
I hate referendums. Unless I agree with them and we win...which is never basically.
JonathanEx
Member
Others have explained that bit - though for a fun bit of extra, the chap who defected has now left UKIP, so they're unlikely to even keep the first seat.
If you LOVE data, and want to see how the collapse in UKIP will benefit the Conservatives, may I suggest this article and it's charts: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39874420
Thnx it does. So basically you guys have regional elections during national elections.
England is about 80% white, so no, not even close to NY.
Err, not quite. The general point is we don't have a national election.
Our national election is 650 regional elections.
Basically, it's a shite system haha.
Royal_Phalanx
Member
Only London is like that in terms of diversity.
Audioboxer
Member
A Little bit higher, although these figures are from 2011!
England
Scotland
Wales
N. Ireland
Those figures also tell the tale of the popularity differences between the England and the rUK. England is the most diverse by the numbers, but they probably have London to thank for that.
London actually seems to drop below 50% white ~ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20680565
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Others have explained that bit - though for a fun bit of extra, the chap who defected has now left UKIP, so they're unlikely to even keep the first seat.
If you LOVE data, and want to see how the collapse in UKIP will benefit the Conservatives, may I suggest this article and it's charts: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39874420
This graph is a really good explanation of why Corbyn is not even the largest problem for Labour. Corbyn could outperform Miliband by 5% and still lose nearly 60 seats just because of the UKIP -> Conservative movement. To do something about that, Labour needs to be seen as a credible party on Brexit. But you can count the number of Brexit-enthusiastic Labour politicians on the fingers of one foot. Labour has been taken over by the middle classes, long before Corbyn, and we've reached the day where middle class and working class interests are just totally divergent.
Audioboxer
Member
No one is going to stroke the flames of anti-immigrant/the EU are meanies rhetoric better than the Tories. Labour have zero chance chasing old UKIP voters. Just in the same way they have close to zero chance now of catching masses of pro-Union support in Scotland. The Conservatives are better at outdoing them on chasing "hard-policy" voters, across the whole of the UK.
The best groups to go after are moderate Tory voters.
Basically, anyone in the 46% remain that votes Tory. Some of those in Leave, sure, but the bulk of Leave will either be hard Tories or UKIP.
And even more importantly as I've said a few times now, youth. A lot of the older votes, especially 65+ are lost causes. They'll never change from Tory, regardless of what Labour says about Brexit. As they're the largest demographic who actually vote that is slaying Labour in many parts of England.
Labour needs to get the youth vote up nearer 60~65%
Sure, but it's a battle Labour should at least be engaged in. There are other battles which are 99.9% pointless ~ Such as chasing UKIP voters.
Huw_Dawson
Member
Soft Tories who voted Remain are most likely to go to the Lib Dems - especially in London.
Yeah. Hugely anecdotal but my Mum votes Con but is socially liberal and voted Remain. She is considering switching to LD.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
It's not about being a hard Brexiter or whatever. If you're still thinking of things in those terms, you're behind the times. The status quo is: the overwhelming majority of the public accepts that Brexit has to happen. Their interest is in ensuring that the UK gets the best possible Brexit, not whether Brexit can happen - and that's true even of Conservatives who voted Remain. Labour is seen as weak, likely to roll over to the EU, and a party that will deliver a bad deal. You can't get elected on that. To be a serious contender in the near future, Labour needs to sound, well, like it really wants to batter those bastards in Brussels and bring back the bacon for British workers. Instead, it sounds metropolitan and effete.
This is why the SNP does well - it's a mirror Tory party. It tells you it'll stand up to the bastards in Westminster and bring back the bacon for ordinary hard-working Scots. It's the same basic principle - people are retreating to smaller, more insular communities. In Scotland, it's just a leftwing party that's managed to capitalise on that. That hasn't happened in England because the older, more communitarian Labour tradition was killed off over the course of the '90s and '00s, and England has no devolved bodies where an outsider party can challenge in the way that the Scottish Parliament gave the SNP their start.
Soft Tories aren't switching to Remain. Or to be precise, about 1 in every 50 2015 Tory/2016 Remain voter intend to vote Liberal Democrat. Your anecdotes are nice, but you belong to a class utterly out of touch with the majority of voters. We can see this in the polls: there's no significant Liberal Democrat recovery. They've moved up 1.6% in the polling average on their 2015 performance.
Also, bluntly speaking, there's a lot more old people than there are young people. Focusing on young people is a long-term investment that will take like twenty years to pay off. It's not relevant to winning in 2017, or 2022.
This is why the SNP does well - it's a mirror Tory party. It tells you it'll stand up to the bastards in Westminster and bring back the bacon for ordinary hard-working Scots. It's the same basic principle - people are retreating to smaller, more insular communities. In Scotland, it's just a leftwing party that's managed to capitalise on that. That hasn't happened in England because the older, more communitarian Labour tradition was killed off over the course of the '90s and '00s, and England has no devolved bodies where an outsider party can challenge in the way that the Scottish Parliament gave the SNP their start.
Soft Tories aren't switching to Remain. Or to be precise, about 1 in every 50 2015 Tory/2016 Remain voter intend to vote Liberal Democrat. Your anecdotes are nice, but you belong to a class utterly out of touch with the majority of voters. We can see this in the polls: there's no significant Liberal Democrat recovery. They've moved up 1.6% in the polling average on their 2015 performance.
Also, bluntly speaking, there's a lot more old people than there are young people. Focusing on young people is a long-term investment that will take like twenty years to pay off. It's not relevant to winning in 2017, or 2022.
A Little bit higher, although these figures are from 2011!
England
Scotland
Wales
N. Ireland
Those figures also tell the tale of the popularity differences between the England and the rUK. England is the most diverse by the numbers, but they probably have London to thank for that.
London actually seems to drop below 50% white ~ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20680565
Probably be a bit lower now
Lib Dems are only seen as a viable option in a small number of seats though, right?
@Audioboxer (forgot to quote)
I think there are as many hard remain as hard leave, and Labour won't have much chance with either extreme.
Fernando Fernandez
Member
Stories on the doorstop is that in the constituency next to us, Conservatives are gaining Lib Dem votes due to their remain stance.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
This is also happening. Just over a third of 2015 Liberal Democrat voters went with Leave, after all. Nick Clegg's party was at one point the only party with seats in the House of Commons promising an EU referendum! The Liberal Democrats used to be the protest party. Now they're the establishment party, and people wonder why they're not picking votes up much!
Relevant to Crab's post:
The "48 Percent" Do Not Exist:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017/05/remain-delusion-48-cent-do-not-exist
The "48 Percent" Do Not Exist:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017/05/remain-delusion-48-cent-do-not-exist
YouGov with some new data:
-----
Would you support or oppose keeping the fox hunting ban in place?
Support - 67%
Oppose - 17%
Don't know - 16%
-----
Support for the ban by party:
SNP - 84%
LAB - 80%
LD - 78%
UKIP - 62%
CON - 52%
-----
Support for the ban by social class:
Working class: 67%
Upper/middle class: 67%
-----
Support by region:
Scotland - 77%
North - 71%
South - 65%
London - 61% (wtf)
Midlands & Wales - 64%
-----
This policy makes no sense from any point of view. I was very surprised at those London figures.
-----
Would you support or oppose keeping the fox hunting ban in place?
Support - 67%
Oppose - 17%
Don't know - 16%
-----
Support for the ban by party:
SNP - 84%
LAB - 80%
LD - 78%
UKIP - 62%
CON - 52%
-----
Support for the ban by social class:
Working class: 67%
Upper/middle class: 67%
-----
Support by region:
Scotland - 77%
North - 71%
South - 65%
London - 61% (wtf)
Midlands & Wales - 64%
-----
This policy makes no sense from any point of view. I was very surprised at those London figures.
Audioboxer
Member
Anyone with a brain knows Brexit has to happen. It was voted for. The battleground shifted to hard Brexit vs soft, whatever that entails. Plus also optics, meaning, hard Brexiteers get their blood pumping when May acts like a dick to the EU and says "negative things"/"they're bullying us"/"rule Britannia!". The general public isn't being fed anything worthwhile to suggest anything about deals other than Tory PR fluff that the UK acting like a "hard bastard" will mean "taking it to those EU cronies and smashing a good deal out of them!" and "strong leadership". However, diplomacy isn't like a football match, although acting like bellends is a sure-shot way to at least frustrate those you're trying to break up with. Who can blame some of the EU folks taking jabs at the UK at this point considering how hostile we've been.
Whereas the other parties are largely saying maybe let us be a bit more diplomatic about it? Even Sturgeon did that for a month(s) before even heading for indyref2 as May and the Tories went off like a wrecking ball trying to "teach the EU a lesson"/"Britain is a force to be reckoned with".
The point of the youth is how they tend to vote. Labour has to make small steps to recovery and you'd have to be smoking some strong imported American Weed to actually think there isn't a well of support sitting untapped in those youth turnout figures. As opposed to prancing off after ex-UKIP voters and hard Tories.
Okay, some figures
Demographics for 18~24 in England as 16yr olds cannot vote for now
At least 3.6m, plus whatever can be taken from the 3.3m (for 18~19). Probably 1.5m+.
Let's say 5m then
65+
Roughly 8.5m
So sure, old outweighs young, it always will, but that's just the 18-24 category. It's still somewhere to focus on as only 40% of them are turning out.
You'll probably find some in the 65+ categories as we reach the top end of ages may be restricted due to illness, or at least youth in the 18-24 categories are probably nearly all eligible to vote.
So yeah, I accept your point of more old than youth, if we're talking the youngest category (18-24). However, I still hit back with at 40% turnout and also being the highest voters of Labour, Labour would be daft not to focus there
Based Scotland and SNP. Good guy Labour too.
I think the London figure is due to the Urban Foxes being a problem rather than the Fox Hunt.
Nobody wants it back. It's such a stupid policy. This is the sort of shit that will get pushed through when they don't have to answer to anyone.
Not that those being polled would necessarily know, but it is legal to kill urban foxes. Just not on horseback or with a pack of dogs.
Is the very nature of the youth vote not that it remains untapped, across elections and even (broadly speaking) across nations? Is Labour better off not going after established voters than those who historically cannot be relied upon? Genuine question.
Thankfully it's a free vote rather than a whipped vote, so there still might be enough pressure among activists and constituents to fuck up any MPs that vote for it.
For example, if one of these Scottish MPs gets elected for the Tories, these figures would indicate they'd get slaughtered by the public for voting that way in a free vote.
Toytown Assassin
Member
As I understand it the policy is to allow a free vote on it so it wouldn't get pushed through and probably wouldn't pass as a lot of tories are against as well.
Royal_Phalanx
Member
Better strategy for Lib Dems would be abandon the 2nd referendum and go hard on staying in the EEA/EFTA or going the Switzerland route. Catch the socially liberal free trade minded soft Conservative voters (I still believe some do exist, though they're a minority voice within that party) with that stance by also promoting the idea that 'you can make all the trade deals you want whilst keeping close to our fellow Europeans economically and socially'.
Also, the youth vote did reach 60%+ during the referendum. Make the youth angry enough to vote in this one. Living in a country heading in a regressive direction and having a government that is going to fuck you over more than most in the negotiations with the EU should anger you. There's plenty of things to be angry about.
Also, the youth vote did reach 60%+ during the referendum. Make the youth angry enough to vote in this one. Living in a country heading in a regressive direction and having a government that is going to fuck you over more than most in the negotiations with the EU should anger you. There's plenty of things to be angry about.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
The first bit of your post doesn't really say anything interesting. It just says "Maybe negotiations require tact". This is probably true, but that doesn't mean people will vote for it. As an example, the best way for SNP members to achieve absolutely any of their goals bar independence would be for them to immediately quit the SNP and rejoin Scottish Labour, revitalising the only national leftwing party. However, sticking it to the man in Westminster is more important than negotiating with receptive partners, same as sticking it to the man in Brussels is more important than negotiating with receptive partners.
To be blunt: you're joking if you think there is a majority in ignoring older people to chase young people. Yes, there are probably a few votes in going after the young, I don't deny that, but in order to get those votes, you have to reduce your appeal to older people, which loses you far more votes.
May's special interests groups that she's promised a vote to in return for god knows what.
I'd imagine it's a misguided attempt to fire up the Tory base to make sure that they turn out to vote instead of getting complacent.
As I believe Psi has said before though, some countrysiders do get super passionate about this for reasons that as a city boy I can't quite fathom. Same with the badger stuff, which seems horrific, but I'm in enough ignorance of that I don't really chime in.
I was thinking this, but I can't even think who would have that much leverage? Perhaps some deal to shut up the hard right backbenchers RE: brexit during negotiations in return for this weird ideological thing? Dunno.
Audioboxer
Member
Not many places have tried allowing 16-year-olds to vote, and from that having more focus in secondary education on voting before teenagers breakaway at 18 to go and
If you follow the minds of average youth late teens tend to be the heights of "rebellion" and "all I care about is myself/having fun". If you've not got someone engaged by 18~21, then it might be years you lose them until they're living in their own homes in the mid to late 20s and have more "adult" responsibilities.
Hence why I think a reasonable way to try and tackle it is to drop the age to 16, where you can legally do quite a lot in the UK already (including marriage/children, which you need government support with....), and get many engaged more from secondary education.
From indy ref in 2014
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/12/many-16-17-year-olds-voted/
The Scottish Youth parliament is encouraging as well
http://www.syp.org.uk/syp_elections...le_are_engaged_in_politics_now_more_than_ever
I've never said that, simply that there are many votes that could be gained focusing on youth. To get the elderly changing sides you usually need to threaten pensions or tell them the immigrants are coming to wreck their NHS. The kinds of "political banter" that just won't sit right with a lot of modern Labour. As I've said a few times you cannot outdo the Tories at fear-mongering, blaming others, frightening and so on.
There's also a lot of psychology behind old people not liking change, not wanting to do anything differently and having strong allegiances to voting how they have for the past xx years no matter what. They simply aren't a demographic there is a lot of joy to be had. For Labour it's all about youth, and categories up to 64. No one is saying ignore the elderly, just you won't get much joy changing minds in the 65+ bracket.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Put another way: most people don't want fox-hunting to be legal, but it is a very low priority issue for them, below their job prospects, the local crime rate, the council bin routines, etc. While only a small minority of people want it legalised, that small minority usually care a great deal. So, even though it doesn't initially look like it, it's probably a vote-winner on net (well, it doesn't win new votes, but it mobilises existing votes effectively).
Huw_Dawson
Member
This is why it's important for us to do as well as possible in those small numbers of seats. The dream is us running a barnstormer of a campaign - and I'm beginning to believe we are running a good one, looking at the recent Yougov polls - and winning the majority or all of our targets, and ending up with 25 MPs or so.
We've had a doubling of unsure voters expressing a preference for us, for example. Probably not statistically significant, but it's an example of the data I'm thinking about vis-a-vis our leaflet design.
Perhaps, although I can't help but think this is a much bigger own goal than has been let on. It's just the kind of "old school Tory bastard" thing that they've tried, and generally, succeeded at getting rid of since Cameron got into power.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
People want bastards now, though. Times are tough, wages haven't risen, people want a big man (or big woman, in Theresa's case).
Put that on a leaflet.
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
It probably matters a lot what environment the sample is taken from. I'd really like to see that survey broken down by urban/rural - as I suspect that is the major cleavage line.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
On a side note, my Liberal Democrat prediction is the easiest one, because there's so few seats you have to predict for and because their polling figures are so unchanged. They'll win Cambridge, Twickenham, Dunbartonshire East, Kingston and Surbiton, and Edinburgh West. Lewes, Carshalton and Wallington, and Norfolk North are toss-ups. They'll lose Richmond Park and Southport. So they'll finish on 10-13. Lots of people will be surprised because they are in the bubble.
Huw_Dawson
Member
Crab: that's my most pessimistic outlook and would be what I'd say we get if we target badly.
Bad night: 10-13
Good night: 13-18
Amazing night: 19-25
But looking into the campaign polling numbers, it's clear that the Labour vote is very soft, and in some constituencies the UKIP vote is actually not all that likely to turn out for the Tories when presented with no Kipper on the ballot.
My feeling is that Norfolk North is safe, Southport is a tossup, RP is only in question because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I can't imagine May's fox hunting policy is going to go down well there. (I'd also be curious if that Tory internal polling was pre- or post- Goldsmith becoming PPC). But I don't like being ignorant to polling, even if it's not numbers I agree with.
Lewes will be a test of our strength in Leave areas. Will the Tories spend enough time attacking us, or are they too focussed on "May's Team" and "Corbyn Chaos"?
There's some bonkers constituencies that I wonder about. Manchester Withington, for example. John Leech is currently the Opposition to Manchester Council, and was previously the exceptionally popular MP. With Labour in chaos, who knows? And the same is true in Manchester Gorton, which was looking like a possible shock. What about the Leeds seat we nearly selected David Ward for? Is it possible another candidate could get the value of the badge but not the name? The Cornish targets, St Ives especially. Farron went all the way down for a town hall (and was rather good, too) - is having a strong spokesman more important than a Brexiteer? What about Brecon and Radnorshire? Or hell, Burnley?
Is it possible we're living through "Maymania" right now, and she's going to come down to Earth with a bump before the end of the campaign?
Other than thinking "we'll end up in a better position than we started with" I really have no idea what is going to happen with us. It'll be an excuse for a cheery drink even if we end up with only one more MP.
Bad night: 10-13
Good night: 13-18
Amazing night: 19-25
But looking into the campaign polling numbers, it's clear that the Labour vote is very soft, and in some constituencies the UKIP vote is actually not all that likely to turn out for the Tories when presented with no Kipper on the ballot.
My feeling is that Norfolk North is safe, Southport is a tossup, RP is only in question because I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I can't imagine May's fox hunting policy is going to go down well there. (I'd also be curious if that Tory internal polling was pre- or post- Goldsmith becoming PPC). But I don't like being ignorant to polling, even if it's not numbers I agree with.
Lewes will be a test of our strength in Leave areas. Will the Tories spend enough time attacking us, or are they too focussed on "May's Team" and "Corbyn Chaos"?
There's some bonkers constituencies that I wonder about. Manchester Withington, for example. John Leech is currently the Opposition to Manchester Council, and was previously the exceptionally popular MP. With Labour in chaos, who knows? And the same is true in Manchester Gorton, which was looking like a possible shock. What about the Leeds seat we nearly selected David Ward for? Is it possible another candidate could get the value of the badge but not the name? The Cornish targets, St Ives especially. Farron went all the way down for a town hall (and was rather good, too) - is having a strong spokesman more important than a Brexiteer? What about Brecon and Radnorshire? Or hell, Burnley?
Is it possible we're living through "Maymania" right now, and she's going to come down to Earth with a bump before the end of the campaign?
Other than thinking "we'll end up in a better position than we started with" I really have no idea what is going to happen with us. It'll be an excuse for a cheery drink even if we end up with only one more MP.
Huw_Dawson
Member
We were written off after the last GE. The fact we'd be able to win seats again - and not just via lucky by-elections - after only 25 months is an impressive turnaround. There are a good number of political parties in Britain - Plaid, Green, UKIP and so on - who have stagnated or struggled to grow without being hit by massive Coalition shocks.
EDIT:
Welsh Labour have all but declared independence at this point - "it's not our manifesto", they claim.
EDIT:
Welsh Labour have all but declared independence at this point - "it's not our manifesto", they claim.
Audioboxer
Member
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
That's not Welsh Labour declaring independence. They were already independent. Wales does have significant devolved powers, you know - of course they're not going to have the same platform as Labour in England.
Or, people don't know how the labour party works?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked