-
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
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
YouGOV's statistical model:
CON: 42% (nc)
LAB: 38% (-1)
LIB: 9% (nc)
UKIP: 3% (-1)
That's a forecast of:
CON: 313 seats (-17)
LAB: 257 (+25)
LIB: 10 (+2)
SNP: 48 (-8)
PC: 2 (-1)
UKIP: 0 (-1)
CON: 42% (nc)
LAB: 38% (-1)
LIB: 9% (nc)
UKIP: 3% (-1)
That's a forecast of:
CON: 313 seats (-17)
LAB: 257 (+25)
LIB: 10 (+2)
SNP: 48 (-8)
PC: 2 (-1)
UKIP: 0 (-1)
Corbyn looks so relaxed compared to Theresa May. The difference between the two is really something.
Theonik
Member
Better update that crossover chart Crab!
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I'm actually sort of interested to see where it is at this point. Might do it with the last week's polls this evening.
no cos a lot of those young left wing voters will be pulled to the right as they begin to get established in life and have actual income to tax
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
That's not quite true. Politics tends to have a 'cohort effect'. People form their political beliefs when they are quite young, in their early 20s typically, and then never really deviate from them. E.g., the baby boomers have always been very rightwing, from the very first election they voted in, whereas the generation before them was actually relatively leftwing, and stayed that way.
The rest of the data is typically explained by movements in parties, not voters - e.g., the liberal position in 1960 would have been legalising homosexuality, in 2010 it was gay marriage, so you could have been a liberal cohort in 1960 but conservative come 2010. The Conservatives in 2017 are much more liberal and left than they were in 1987.
So, to an extent, yes: once the baby boomers are gone, we probably will see some pretty sharp political realignments. The US are closer to this than us, though.
The rest of the data is typically explained by movements in parties, not voters - e.g., the liberal position in 1960 would have been legalising homosexuality, in 2010 it was gay marriage, so you could have been a liberal cohort in 1960 but conservative come 2010. The Conservatives in 2017 are much more liberal and left than they were in 1987.
So, to an extent, yes: once the baby boomers are gone, we probably will see some pretty sharp political realignments. The US are closer to this than us, though.
That would be amazing, and a huge fat humiliation for May.
itsbenoclock
Member
Conservatives culling their own vote by privatising the NHS
I dunno. On the face of certain issues, yes - but there's a very strong vein of almost Victorian-style ideals that aren't going to go away ever because it is completely ingrained in the Conservative ideology.
I mean, we've already seen the poor and undeserving poor repackaged for a new generation.
Funny I Googled Gordon Brown and he wrote a piece on the Guardian where he asked people to vote Labour without mentioning Corbyn at all.
Importantly, they present themselves as far more liberal. That's to make themselves palatable to the changing tastes of the electorate.
Nah this is pure nonsense. I'm well established in my job and earn a decent salary and I have no problem paying more income tax if it means better public services and a healthy and cohesive society. Here's a novel idea for you, some people actually care if the poor family down the street can send their kids to university and have a decent standard of living. How so much Hobbesian rubbish got beaten into people's heads is astounding.
Would a Labor/SNP/Lib coalition be workable?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
No. Assuming 4 SF MPs are returned, you need to hit 323 seats.
Oh, I feel bad for laughing at that but I actually giggled in the office.
Huw_Dawson
Member
The SNP have ruled out a formal coalition. (Same as the Lib Dems)
JonathanEx
Member
In the unlikely event YouGov is right... what's the likelyhood there that that just means we can't have a stable govt, as coalition talks fail and if say SNP doesn't support the Labour queen's speech... and we do this all again in September?
SlipperyFishes
Banned
Good because that would be a conservative talking point that might swing voters to them.
Make a formal coalition after if necessary
ReplacementPelican
Member
Sweet Christmas that's a harsh (albeit good) joke. I shouldn't have laughed.
Wouldn't be the worst thing to happen. In a perfect world the Tories and Labour would stop being petulant dick-swinging twats and maybe parliament could work a bit better.
Huw_Dawson
Member
SF do not take their seats in the HOC. The Labour-aligned sitting members are the SDLP.
The Lib Dems have ruled out any pact, coalition, deal or otherwise with Corbyn or May. They'd get vote-by-vote support based on the issue of the day and nothing more.
TomWaitsForNoMan
Banned
Sinn Fein will never take their seats. Well, not until we sort ourselves out anyway
That's great and I'm in the same boat but it doesn't apply to a lot of people. I know a lot of people who see their whole world as their kids, wife, house & car. They see things like 'increase personal tax allowance' and know that they will get a direct benefit from voting Tory which they justify as "I'm just looking out for my family".
Theonik
Member
That's the joke.
SNP only cares about what happens above the border and Indyref 2. They'd be easy enough to placate even if they don't enter a formal coalition!
I wouldn't be happy about it.
I think all these 'NO COALITION' lines are just what they have to say now to avoid the bad press, I think all sides would start looking for a coalition in the event they could actually get one.
Huw_Dawson
Member
There is simply no way that a coalition between the Lib Dems and Labour or Tories could work.
It seems like a means to an end rather than solidified change. As we've seen over the last year and in their manifesto, they're more than willing to lurch back to the right in areas they don't even need to.
The Lib Dems should be fine pairing up with Labour if they get weed and the Brexit deal ref through.
But it does mean Tory's would need the Irish Unionists. Brexit gets more complicated as, although they are pro-brexit - they will not want pain-in-the-ass NI border controls and they are afraid it will lead to a border poll.
Although predicting Irish Unionist is folly at best.
EDIT: also with that kind of slim majority the Brexit negotiations will be brutal.
Audioboxer
Member
Not necessarily if they can be shown a country is more than able to genuinely treasure something like the NHS. The biggest con some of the politicians manage to sow in the minds of workers is that taxes cannot be prioritised and managed well enough to support good social policy.
It's a carrot and stick affair where many get convinced their taxes are never going to be valued because those poor people/disabled/sick and foreigners will forever gobble them up. So instead, vote incredibly self-centered and all about yourself in order to prevent those other people getting your tax. Fuck you, I want mine, and don't you dare try and leech off me. It's the worst mindset this Tory-led British government has fostered and it's incredibly damaging and toxic to the future of the UK.
To be fair, Labour has been all up in that as well (in years gone by). For a decent amount of time now the slow-burn of turning the population against itself has been in play. It benefits the rich and it benefits those with power. It's the ultimate control game. It leaves those at the bottom of the food chain savaging themselves and convinces the middle-class they can appear "upper class" if they hate on the pathetic lower-class and attempt to vote all about themselves. Ultimately though, the middle-class suffers too, as most cannot afford to actually appear "rich". Just because you vote Tory does not "make you" rich. Hence, swarms of people constantly voting against their interests and then months/years later shouting about things are terrible/haven't got any better.
With the state this country is currently in we could vote to privatise the NHS and then turn around a week later and say "How dare the NHS be privatised, fuck the poor and foreigners!". Especially when a chunk of the middle-class realises they can't really afford private health care for them and all their family. Or even if they can technically afford it, it takes up a decent chunk of their budget. It sums up Brexit too, "fuck the EU bringing us down and all those foreigners!", with a week later leading into what about the EU University funding/jobs?!?! HELP!
In that scenario the Tories stay in power but they have no natural coalition partner but could probably squeeze by with DUP support (maybe?) but that is literally bringing things down to 1 or 2 votes every time.
Theresa May would be shanked on Friday Morning with that result, the whole thing would be blown to bits.
At this point it feels like YouGov are publishing these numbers for the LOLs
Huw_Dawson
Member
An election in November.
If we get the results that Yougov predict, it will be an election in November.
Dirtyshubb
Member
The weed deal Would also help Labour justify spending on the manifesto, extra income to help get them everything they want.
There is a huge contradiction within the Unionist parties. Politically they cannot campaign on a hard border. That would throw the whole island into chaos as work, travel and trade barriers destroy the economy. But they also cannot support customs arrangements between NI and GB.
And with the Tories pledging to pull us out the EU Customs Union, there is a huge political problem that seems without a solution... unless NI gets a bespoke Brexit deal but then Scotland would want a bespoke deal as well.
Theonik
Member
Or NI leaves the union I guess.
DarthMasta
Member
You guys keep doing your thing, take your time, it's not like there's any kind of time sensitive issues that need to be taken care of...
Very anecdotal evidence, but over the last week my wife has managed to convince 3 former Tory supporters to vote for Labour (well, one of them Lib Dems, because of tactical voting)
Reasons are mostly NHS. Also they don't think much of May (one of them was a massive Cameron fan)
One voted Tory in the past because "benefit cheats" but is beginning to realise things are going / have gone to far.
Still have concerns about Corbyn (and Abbott). "Bit useless" and one of them (who's job is kind of relevant to the issue) still has misgivings about how Corbyn would affect national security.
Reasons are mostly NHS. Also they don't think much of May (one of them was a massive Cameron fan)
One voted Tory in the past because "benefit cheats" but is beginning to realise things are going / have gone to far.
Still have concerns about Corbyn (and Abbott). "Bit useless" and one of them (who's job is kind of relevant to the issue) still has misgivings about how Corbyn would affect national security.
How is this calculated? Surely the Greens won't lose their Brighton seat?
I don't think another election is viable. The time table is for Brexit is already tight.
Lib Dems would be all for it. If you can bring into disrepute this election result and ask again it certainly brings more legitimacy to asking again about Brexit.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I'm inclined to agree. 310 is like the sweetspot for "everything is shit". CON + DUP + UUP isn't enough, LAB + SNP + PC + GRN isn't enough, the LDs aren't doing anything, nothing is stable, we have our third election in three years.
Strong and stable, folks.
If you thought the Scottish Referendum was divisive, an Irish one still has the possibility of terrorism engulfing the whole process.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Greens was 1 (nc); didn't bother stating them because they're not different.
Ashcroft's model has also been updated.
CON: 355 (+25)
LAB: 224 (-8)
LD: 5 (-3)
SNP: 46 (-10)
PC: 1 (-2)
Greens: 0 (-1)
UKIP: 0 (-1)
His model is the most conservative (and Conservative!) of the major forecasters.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked