Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Latest Electoral Calculus projection has CON 15 seats ahead ev

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited February 1 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Latest Electoral Calculus projection has CON 15 seats ahead even on a 0.5% lower average vote share

The latest seat prediction from Electoral Calculus another reminder to LAB that the system now works in favour of the Tories. CON average vote share 0.5% behind but with clear lead on seatshttps://t.co/VmVdusO6wz pic.twitter.com/QsV9I7FkL0

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 65,000
    edited February 1
    But I remember 2015 when Dave had to be by 10% ahead just to get a majority of 2.
  • Primus inter pares, again.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    I hope the politicians are ignoring this kind of thing and concentrating on coming up with a programme that benefits the country.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,741
    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,517
    Good afternoon, my fellow petrolheads.

    Nothing new. In 2005, Labour had a tiny lead and a majority of 60.
  • The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,165
    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    But, very tenuously.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,052

    I hope the politicians are ignoring this kind of thing and concentrating on coming up with a programme that benefits the country.

    Yes - I'm pretty unconvinced by these methodologies of converting vote share into seats based on polls ages away from an election.
  • Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Don't be too sure about that.

    In 1979 the SNP voted with the Tories to oust a Labour government, and helped usher in eleven years of Thatcher and 18 years of Tory rule.

    In 1979 the SNP were to Thatcher what the Lib Dems were to Dave in 2010
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,818

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    If he does it will be clear that he neither understands nor cares about democracy.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 7,428

    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Don't be too sure about that.

    In 1979 the SNP voted with the Tories to oust a Labour government, and helped usher in eleven years of Thatcher and 18 years of Tory rule.

    In 1979 the SNP were to Thatcher what the Lib Dems were to Dave in 2010
    In 1979 the Turkeys voted for Christmas. I doubt they will do so again.
  • The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    If he does it will be clear that he neither understands nor cares about democracy.
    If he puts it in the Labour manifesto to reform the voting system a sovereign Parliament will be reflecting the wishes of the people.

    There's precedent, had Michael Foot won in 1983 he would have overturned the result of the 1975 referendum with a manifesto commitment.
  • VinnyVinny Posts: 32
    That means a labour-led coalition with a majority of 42 over the Tories.
  • Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Don't be too sure about that.

    In 1979 the SNP voted with the Tories to oust a Labour government, and helped usher in eleven years of Thatcher and 18 years of Tory rule.

    In 1979 the SNP were to Thatcher what the Lib Dems were to Dave in 2010
    In 1979 the Turkeys voted for Christmas. I doubt they will do so again.
    History does have a habit of repeating itself.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 470

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    If he does it will be clear that he neither understands nor cares about democracy.
    Parliament is sovereign. Wasn't that what Brexit was all about?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,741

    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Don't be too sure about that.

    In 1979 the SNP voted with the Tories to oust a Labour government, and helped usher in eleven years of Thatcher and 18 years of Tory rule.

    In 1979 the SNP were to Thatcher what the Lib Dems were to Dave in 2010
    Not a chance the SNP would support the Tories (Same with Plaid and the Greens), Nicola would be Jeremy's Arlene.
    You can make more of a case for the Lib Dems propping up the Tories, it is marginally more likely than the Nats (Ex DU & UUP) but still highly unlikely. The biggest favour the Lib Dems might give the Tories is abstaining on a Labour QS.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,741
    Vinny said:

    That means a labour-led coalition with a majority of 42 over the Tories.

    The Lib Dems wouldn't give supply to Labour with these numbers I suspect as the substantive deal could be and would be done with Sturgeon and Wood.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 2,667

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    That question is asymmetrical. Promoting fairness for 'smaller political parties' vs. 'effective government'? Come on.
  • The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The voters are thick.

    The same voters stupidly want to renationalise the railways.

    Emily Thornberry is wrong, we need to restrict the franchise, not widen it.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 2,667

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    As I understand it his preference is for a FPTP Commons with a PR-elected Lords, which I find to be quite an elegant solution. Strong government from one house, checked by a truly representative people's chamber.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,478

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    If he does it will be clear that he neither understands nor cares about democracy.
    I would suggest that is self-evident.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345
    Freggles said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    That question is asymmetrical. Promoting fairness for 'smaller political parties' vs. 'effective government'? Come on.
    Tell the BES.....its the same question they asked in 2015 which produced a tie. Nobody complained then......
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,784
    edited February 1
    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.
  • The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    Why on earth would he do that? If he brought in, say PR, it would be much easier for the moderates to jump ship and create a new party.

    While the Cons may be benefiting most from FPTP, Labour and the SNP are also winners. The LDs, Greens and UKIP are losers.

    Rather than change the voting system, PM Corbyn would be wiser to change the boundary review to be based on total population instead of electorate.
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 1,757
    But this 'the system' will change depending on who votes next time, with different votes piled up in different places. The 'system' is not going to change each election. This sort of analysis is inherently facile.

    There are major system issues - Welsh seats are significantly underpopulated, for example.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,076

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I think the only dilemma for the jurors was whether or not to have a cup of tea before returning their verdict.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 4,133
    Looking at the 15 seat lead predicted by Electoral Calculus, would this not be a fantastic opportunity for the PM to call a snap election and increase her majority to give her more authority for Brexit?

    :D :D
  • It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    edited February 1
    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Yes, but for how long? There is definitely a majority to No Confidence any Conservative government on those number, which presumably would resign on recognition of that fact, but in order for Labour to get anything through - a Queen's Speech, a Budget, any piece of legislation or parliamentary motion - it would need one (or more) of:

    - a sizable Tory rebellion
    - official Tory abstention
    - SNP support (plus no opposition from Plaid and Green)
    - SNP and DUP abstentions and support from pretty much everywhere else
    - Total or near-unanimity among Labour MPs

    That's just not going to happen time after time after time.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,784

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I think the only dilemma for the jurors was whether or not to have a cup of tea before returning their verdict.
    I would hope they made sure they got their free canteen meal before they rushed into such an important decision.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,741
    edited February 1

    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Yes, but for how long? There is definitely a majority to No Confidence any Conservative government on those number, which presumably would resign on recognition of that fact, but in order for Labour to get anything through - a Queen's Speech, a Budget, any piece of legislation or parliamentary motion - it would need one (or more) of:

    - a sizable Tory rebellion
    - official Tory abstention
    - SNP support
    - SNP and DUP abstentions and support from pretty much everywhere else
    - Total or near-unanimity among Labour MPs

    That's just not going to happen time after time after time.
    The Government would be defeated a fair bit but I expect it would work about as well in practice as the current Government is faring. (I mean in terms of getting votes through !)
    The 14 Lib Dem votes are quite important here.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 1,652

    But this 'the system' will change depending on who votes next time, with different votes piled up in different places. The 'system' is not going to change each election. This sort of analysis is inherently facile.

    There are major system issues - Welsh seats are significantly underpopulated, for example.

    In fact, the Tories should simply implement boundary changes to the Welsh seats (which unlike the Scottish seats were not redrawn after devolution).

    And if the Tories were ultra-smart, throw in extra powers for the Welsh assembly. That would ensure Plaid Cymru support.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,741


    And if the Tories were ultra-smart, throw in extra powers for the Welsh assembly. That would ensure Plaid Cymru support.

    Are you sure ?
    Would Plaid really support the Tories :o ?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 1,652
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Yes, but for how long? There is definitely a majority to No Confidence any Conservative government on those number, which presumably would resign on recognition of that fact, but in order for Labour to get anything through - a Queen's Speech, a Budget, any piece of legislation or parliamentary motion - it would need one (or more) of:

    - a sizable Tory rebellion
    - official Tory abstention
    - SNP support
    - SNP and DUP abstentions and support from pretty much everywhere else
    - Total or near-unanimity among Labour MPs

    That's just not going to happen time after time after time.
    The Government would be defeated a fair bit but I expect it would work about as well in practice as the current Government is faring.

    I suspect it wouldn't. The Tories & DUP are not competing for the same seats.

    The SNP/PC and Labour are in direct opposition in many seats.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 1,652
    Pulpstar said:


    And if the Tories were ultra-smart, throw in extra powers for the Welsh assembly. That would ensure Plaid Cymru support.

    Are you sure ?
    Would Plaid really support the Tories :o ?
    They are strongly in favour of more powers for the Welsh assembly.

    The Tories and Plaid Cymru do share the same goal. They both want to reduce the influence of the Welsh MPs at Westminster. The former for narrow electoral reasons, the latter because they want the decisions taken in Wales.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
    He's busy suing the police:

  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    Freggles said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    As I understand it his preference is for a FPTP Commons with a PR-elected Lords, which I find to be quite an elegant solution. Strong government from one house, checked by a truly representative people's chamber.
    That's what I've argued for for a long time. It's also what the Lib Dems should have pushed for in 2010 rather than AV for the Commons.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,784
    edited February 1

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
    He's busy suing the police:

    twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/958837013754601473
    I always wonder, what does he actually do for a living? He seems to have a hell of a lot of free time on his hands to get into trouble.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,076
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Yes, but for how long? There is definitely a majority to No Confidence any Conservative government on those number, which presumably would resign on recognition of that fact, but in order for Labour to get anything through - a Queen's Speech, a Budget, any piece of legislation or parliamentary motion - it would need one (or more) of:

    - a sizable Tory rebellion
    - official Tory abstention
    - SNP support
    - SNP and DUP abstentions and support from pretty much everywhere else
    - Total or near-unanimity among Labour MPs

    That's just not going to happen time after time after time.
    The Government would be defeated a fair bit but I expect it would work about as well in practice as the current Government is faring. (I mean in terms of getting votes through !)
    The 14 Lib Dem votes are quite important here.
    The present government takes the approach of implementing a U-turn when they know they are about to lose a vote (most of the time). I would expect that Jezza would force a vote every time, so that MPs have to stand up and be counted (and then potentially deselected by their Momentum-dominated CLPs).
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    There is a colossal "but" regarding this analysis though.

    Corbyn becomes PM on these numbers.

    281 + 37 + 4 +1 (SNP,Plaid and the Greens will never support the Tories at Westminster) = 323.
    Add in Sinn Fein abstention (Worth another 3.5 to both left and right blocks), and 326.5 is achieved.

    Corbyn is definitely PM here.

    Yes, but for how long? There is definitely a majority to No Confidence any Conservative government on those number, which presumably would resign on recognition of that fact, but in order for Labour to get anything through - a Queen's Speech, a Budget, any piece of legislation or parliamentary motion - it would need one (or more) of:

    - a sizable Tory rebellion
    - official Tory abstention
    - SNP support
    - SNP and DUP abstentions and support from pretty much everywhere else
    - Total or near-unanimity among Labour MPs

    That's just not going to happen time after time after time.
    The Government would be defeated a fair bit but I expect it would work about as well in practice as the current Government is faring. (I mean in terms of getting votes through !)
    The 14 Lib Dem votes are quite important here.
    Not really.

    Con+DUP=305
    Lab+Plaid+Green=286

    The swing vote is the SNP's - if they abstained or opposed Lab on a measure, then Lab loses; if they back Lab, then Lab wins, irrespective of what the LDs or Hermon does. Only if Plaid and Lucas desert Labour, or the DUP desert the Tories, do the LD votes become important (or if there are rebels from either big party).
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
    He's busy suing the police:

    twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/958837013754601473
    I always wonder, what does he actually do for a living? He seems to have a hell of a lot of free time on his hands to get into trouble.
    In the video he also reads out his real name (from a Solicitor's letter).....twice......
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,784
    edited February 1

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
    He's busy suing the police:

    twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/958837013754601473
    I always wonder, what does he actually do for a living? He seems to have a hell of a lot of free time on his hands to get into trouble.
    In the video he also reads out his real name (from a Solicitor's letter).....twice......
    It isn't exactly a secret. His real name was revealed years ago. And I doubt the people of Luton don't know who he is, given how much he has been in the media.

    I am guessing he must have his own business or on the rock'n'roll, but I doubt any employer is going to have him.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 1,497

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.
    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The problem with that question is that the present system does not produce effective government.

    If yoou want evidence, look around you.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,827

    Freggles said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    As I understand it his preference is for a FPTP Commons with a PR-elected Lords, which I find to be quite an elegant solution. Strong government from one house, checked by a truly representative people's chamber.
    That's what I've argued for for a long time. It's also what the Lib Dems should have pushed for in 2010 rather than AV for the Commons.
    No, the LDs should have argued for STV for local elections, as (now) in Scotland.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,741

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
    He's busy suing the police:

    twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/958837013754601473
    I always wonder, what does he actually do for a living? He seems to have a hell of a lot of free time on his hands to get into trouble.
    In the video he also reads out his real name (from a Solicitor's letter).....twice......
    It isn't exactly a secret. His real name was revealed years ago. And I doubt the people of Luton don't know who he is, given how much he has been in the media.

    I am guessing he must have his own business or on the rock'n'roll, but I doubt any employer is going to have him.
    Stephen Christopher Yaxley - Occupation: Tanning salon owner
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,784
    edited February 1
    Pulpstar said:

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
    He's busy suing the police:

    twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/958837013754601473
    I always wonder, what does he actually do for a living? He seems to have a hell of a lot of free time on his hands to get into trouble.
    In the video he also reads out his real name (from a Solicitor's letter).....twice......
    It isn't exactly a secret. His real name was revealed years ago. And I doubt the people of Luton don't know who he is, given how much he has been in the media.

    I am guessing he must have his own business or on the rock'n'roll, but I doubt any employer is going to have him.
    Stephen Christopher Yaxley - Occupation: Tanning salon owner
    That makes sense.

    I don't think we need to go into another more detail...we don't want Dox'ing going on.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345
    Well, quite......




    Bet the Civil Service have said 'don't send them out - they'll upset Brussels'......
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 14,818
    PClipp said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.
    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The problem with that question is that the present system does not produce effective government.

    If yoou want evidence, look around you.
    PClipp said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.
    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The problem with that question is that the present system does not produce effective government.

    If yoou want evidence, look around you.
    So your answer is to introduce a system which causes this sort of ineffective mess all the time rather than rarely
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,789
    IanB2 said:

    Freggles said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    As I understand it his preference is for a FPTP Commons with a PR-elected Lords, which I find to be quite an elegant solution. Strong government from one house, checked by a truly representative people's chamber.
    That's what I've argued for for a long time. It's also what the Lib Dems should have pushed for in 2010 rather than AV for the Commons.
    No, the LDs should have argued for STV for local elections, as (now) in Scotland.
    Yes, that would be have been a good option too, delivering a real and assured change. Though it wouldn't have affected Westminster, which is why I think Lords reform would have been a better bet for them.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,494

    Well, quite......

    Bet the Civil Service have said 'don't send them out - they'll upset Brussels'......

    More like “Don’t send them out - they’ll provoke a stampede of businesses leaving.”
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    If he does it will be clear that he neither understands nor cares about democracy.
    Rly? What's to prevent me saying that in saying that you show that you neither understand nor care about representative democracy? Our constitution has got where it has without having plebiscites on things like the Great Reform Act and votes for women, and it's not like we don't have any evidence that an AV referendum would be nothing but than a load of demagogic twattery about which voting system would free up more money for the NH fecking S, plus an opportunity for disgruntled voters to have a little smack at the government because of course refendums are never actually important in the way general elections are.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345

    Well, quite......

    Bet the Civil Service have said 'don't send them out - they'll upset Brussels'......

    More like “Don’t send them out - they’ll provoke a stampede of businesses leaving.”
    Which is what the EU is trying to do......
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 4,924

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The voters are thick.

    The same voters stupidly want to renationalise the railways.

    Emily Thornberry is wrong, we need to restrict the franchise, not widen it.
    The wife and I were talking about that last night. 100 hundred years after woman's suffrage was introduced she thought we ought to take the vote away from men to even up the hundreds of years beforehand that only men had the vote.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The voters are thick.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434
    Pulpstar said:

    It appears nobody believed that the invisible man called Dave drove the van...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42910051

    I am presuming his legal representation didn't come up with that story, because if they did I worry for anybody else they are going to attempt to defend who might not be quite so guilty.

    I'm sure Tommy Robinson will be tweeting about the injustice of it all.
    He's busy suing the police:

    twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/958837013754601473
    I always wonder, what does he actually do for a living? He seems to have a hell of a lot of free time on his hands to get into trouble.
    In the video he also reads out his real name (from a Solicitor's letter).....twice......
    It isn't exactly a secret. His real name was revealed years ago. And I doubt the people of Luton don't know who he is, given how much he has been in the media.

    I am guessing he must have his own business or on the rock'n'roll, but I doubt any employer is going to have him.
    Stephen Christopher Yaxley - Occupation: Tanning salon owner
    Increasing the number of brown people in Luton, then.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,494

    Well, quite......

    Bet the Civil Service have said 'don't send them out - they'll upset Brussels'......

    More like “Don’t send them out - they’ll provoke a stampede of businesses leaving.”
    Which is what the EU is trying to do......
    And you berate the civil service for not trying to help them?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,648
    edited February 1
    Perhaps some polling on banning posting tweets on pb.com might be indicative.

    If I want to read tweets by virtue signalling loud mouths I'll head to twitter.

    I've done it myself but it perhaps is becoming overused. Perhaps the text of the tweet is ok - but the whole pishy visuals are meh.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,090

    Well, quite......




    Bet the Civil Service have said 'don't send them out - they'll upset Brussels'......

    Private companies have been setting in place contingency plans and moving work to the EU27 for months although normally their announcements are dismissed as Project Fear.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,434

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The voters are thick.

    The same voters stupidly want to renationalise the railways.

    Emily Thornberry is wrong, we need to restrict the franchise, not widen it.
    The wife and I were talking about that last night. 100 hundred years after woman's suffrage was introduced she thought we ought to take the vote away from men to even up the hundreds of years beforehand that only men had the vote.
    The boot is on the other foot. Votes for women were introduced without a sniff of a plebiscite by people who self-evidently neither understood nor cared about democracy, and they should be disenfranchised with immediate effect so that the (male) electorate can have a vote on the issue.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 764

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The voters are thick.

    The same voters stupidly want to renationalise the railways.

    Emily Thornberry is wrong, we need to restrict the franchise, not widen it.
    The wife and I were talking about that last night. 100 hundred years after woman's suffrage was introduced she thought we ought to take the vote away from men to even up the hundreds of years beforehand that only men had the vote.

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The voters are thick.

    The same voters stupidly want to renationalise the railways.

    Emily Thornberry is wrong, we need to restrict the franchise, not widen it.
    The wife and I were talking about that last night. 100 hundred years after woman's suffrage was introduced she thought we ought to take the vote away from men to even up the hundreds of years beforehand that only men had the vote.
    Most men didn't get the vote until after 1832 and 1918 extended it to all men irrespective of whether they were a property owner or householder. So you would need to be fair and just remove the vote from male property and land owners starting with buy to let landlords like Phil Hammond.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 5,742

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    Seems like a leading question.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,827

    IanB2 said:

    Freggles said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    As I understand it his preference is for a FPTP Commons with a PR-elected Lords, which I find to be quite an elegant solution. Strong government from one house, checked by a truly representative people's chamber.
    That's what I've argued for for a long time. It's also what the Lib Dems should have pushed for in 2010 rather than AV for the Commons.
    No, the LDs should have argued for STV for local elections, as (now) in Scotland.
    Yes, that would be have been a good option too, delivering a real and assured change. Though it wouldn't have affected Westminster, which is why I think Lords reform would have been a better bet for them.
    In the long run, it would have helped in Westminster, by allowing the party into local government in many more locations, raising the local profile of the party, sustaining an activist base, creating more career paths for a party with few opportunties for the ambitious and capable, and demonstrating the viability of a different way of voting. And it was deliverable, without a referendum. Understandably the MPs were concerned for their own re-election chances and got panicked into accepting a bad deal.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    Seems like a leading question.
    Few complaints in 2015 when it produced a tie......
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,827

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    Seems like a leading question.
    Since the effectiveness of the governments we have had over recent years has been highly questionable, with the one that was a coalition by far the most effective.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    But if it is true that the current boundaries favour the Tories when did they change in their favour?

    If the boundaries favour the Tories how do we explain the fact that 36% voted Labour and they got a majority of 66, and in 2010 36% got the Tories no majority at all?

    And how is the point answered that if Labour seats are mainly in big cities, it takes fewer voters to elect a Labour MP than it does to elect a Tory MP.

    I refer to an article in Labour's New Statesman in 2015 which admits that the current boundaries are indeed a partial -but not total explanation -for Labour's electoral advantage. Labour does get more MPs for the same percentage of the vote than the Tories.

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/labours-electoral-advantage-isnt-mainly-due-boundaries
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,538
    On topic, it seems unlikely that whatever the result at the next election that any swing will be on a uniform national basis. With the last election seeming to have swung constituency by constituency for Brexit-related reasons, it seems unlikely that the next election will see the current sets of marginals swing in a uniform manner.
  • From another PB.

    Labour council leader Clare Kober's decision to quit Haringey, citing bullying and sexism, made headlines this week.

    Clare was certainly much more popular with the party's top brass in 2011. Following the Tottenham riots, she welcomed then-Labour leader Ed Miliband to the area, to show him some of the devastation.

    Ed and his party disembarked the tube at Seven Sisters to be met by Kober and council dignitaries. Immediately Ed started to look around, wide-eyed, and empathised with them about the terrible post-riot wasteland he was confronted by.

    The council leaders had to quietly tell him he hadn't yet got to the scene of the riots. All he could see was... well, Tottenham.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 27,784

    From another PB.

    Labour council leader Clare Kober's decision to quit Haringey, citing bullying and sexism, made headlines this week.

    Clare was certainly much more popular with the party's top brass in 2011. Following the Tottenham riots, she welcomed then-Labour leader Ed Miliband to the area, to show him some of the devastation.

    Ed and his party disembarked the tube at Seven Sisters to be met by Kober and council dignitaries. Immediately Ed started to look around, wide-eyed, and empathised with them about the terrible post-riot wasteland he was confronted by.

    The council leaders had to quietly tell him he hadn't yet got to the scene of the riots. All he could see was... well, Tottenham.

    You can tell he doesn't visit his constituency very often...
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 2,667

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    Seems like a leading question.
    Few complaints in 2015 when it produced a tie......
    I don't remember seeing it at the time.

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 11,009
    "We've had enough" - Exactly what British people have been saying about The Lords since 1910...
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,076
    Perhaps they can add a second question to the ballot asking if the unelected House of Lords should be abolished?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 11,009

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    Unless Jezza wins a a big majority... Then he'll suddenly become a fan of FPTP (Remember Tony was in favour of PR... Until FPTP gave him a 180 seat majority... ;) )
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,104

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    The voters are thick.
    Surely the the best solution is to have parity of esteem and treatment for grid guys?

    Equality demands it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,827
    stevef said:

    But if it is true that the current boundaries favour the Tories when did they change in their favour?

    If the boundaries favour the Tories how do we explain the fact that 36% voted Labour and they got a majority of 66, and in 2010 36% got the Tories no majority at all?

    And how is the point answered that if Labour seats are mainly in big cities, it takes fewer voters to elect a Labour MP than it does to elect a Tory MP.

    I refer to an article in Labour's New Statesman in 2015 which admits that the current boundaries are indeed a partial -but not total explanation -for Labour's electoral advantage. Labour does get more MPs for the same percentage of the vote than the Tories.

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/labours-electoral-advantage-isnt-mainly-due-boundaries

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/electoral-bias-in-the-uk-after-the-2015-general-election/
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    GIN1138 said:

    The time for an alternative voting system is upon us.

    I suspect Prime Minister Corbyn will initiate reform, sans a plebiscite.

    Unless Jezza wins a a big majority... Then he'll suddenly become a fan of FPTP (Remember Tony was in favour of PR... Until FPTP gave him a 180 seat majority... ;) )
    And then of course he might not win and be PM at all......because no opposition has ever formed a government without being at least 15 points ahead in the polls between elections.
  • calumcalum Posts: 3,041
    As today's Survation poll shows a modest SNP recovery could wipe out this slim Tory lead - today's poll would result in the SNP on 44 seats

    http://survation.com/new-scottish-voting-intention-survation-daily-record/
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    What will Labour do if in 2022 it loses a fourth general election in a row?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,741
    Interesting council results to watch outside London:

    Newcastle-under-lyme ?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 18,494
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 28,345
    calum said:

    As today's Survation poll shows a modest SNP recovery could wipe out this slim Tory lead - today's poll would result in the SNP on 44 seats

    http://survation.com/new-scottish-voting-intention-survation-daily-record/


  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,003
    stevef said:

    What will Labour do if in 2022 it loses a fourth general election in a row?

    Of course, Labour has only been out of power for seven and a half years. Now is the equivalent of 1986 - with eleven more years of wilderness ahead - if we're comparing it to 1979-1997.

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,076
    Awks? Seriously? How long has this been a word?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,293
    This is beyond daft.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-42906852

    Frozen food giant Birds Eye has pulled a fish finger advert over concerns raised by County Durham safety campaigners.

    The TV advert featured a man and boy jumping into the sea with a voiceover declaring: "Captain Birds Eye loves the simple things, like jumping into cold water on a hot day with his grandson."

    A campaign group set up after the death of a 14-year-old boy from cold water shock called the advert inappropriate.

    The firm agreed to amend it.
  • Awks? Seriously? How long has this been a word?
    Awks is a totes amazeballs word.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 4,293
    edited February 1
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Pulpstar said:

    It isn't exactly a secret. His real name was revealed years ago. And I doubt the people of Luton don't know who he is, given how much he has been in the media.

    I am guessing he must have his own business or on the rock'n'roll, but I doubt any employer is going to have him.

    Stephen Christopher Yaxley - Occupation: Tanning salon owner
    Increasing the number of brown people in Luton, then.
    That is bloody funny. Racist white man owns business to make white people look more like brown people.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,538

    Awks? Seriously? How long has this been a word?
    There have always been little awks. Great awks were extinct. Until today. This looks like great awks.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    rcs1000 said:

    stevef said:

    What will Labour do if in 2022 it loses a fourth general election in a row?

    Of course, Labour has only been out of power for seven and a half years. Now is the equivalent of 1986 - with eleven more years of wilderness ahead - if we're comparing it to 1979-1997.

    A party is often judged by the number of elections it loses not by the number of years it is out of power. The Liberals had only been out of power for 6 years in 1924, yet it had lost 4 elections:1918, 1922, 1923, 1924, -and it was widely seen a finished party. Indeed it never won a general election again.

    But I repeat my question: what will Labour do if it loses a fourth general election in a row? Labour constantly changed its leader 1979-97 and only returned to power after it had purged Militant -the equivalent then of Momentum. Or will Corbyn do a lap of self congratulatory honour, announce that he will carry on into his 80s and the members decide that it is the voters and not they who are at fault.?
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,478
    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    But if it is true that the current boundaries favour the Tories when did they change in their favour?

    If the boundaries favour the Tories how do we explain the fact that 36% voted Labour and they got a majority of 66, and in 2010 36% got the Tories no majority at all?

    And how is the point answered that if Labour seats are mainly in big cities, it takes fewer voters to elect a Labour MP than it does to elect a Tory MP.

    I refer to an article in Labour's New Statesman in 2015 which admits that the current boundaries are indeed a partial -but not total explanation -for Labour's electoral advantage. Labour does get more MPs for the same percentage of the vote than the Tories.

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/labours-electoral-advantage-isnt-mainly-due-boundaries

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/electoral-bias-in-the-uk-after-the-2015-general-election/
    Very simple. The collapse of the LDs has been the biggest driver of the electoral system now favouring the Tories.

    Quoting GR2005 no longer relevant.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,003
    stevef said:

    rcs1000 said:

    stevef said:

    What will Labour do if in 2022 it loses a fourth general election in a row?

    Of course, Labour has only been out of power for seven and a half years. Now is the equivalent of 1986 - with eleven more years of wilderness ahead - if we're comparing it to 1979-1997.

    A party is often judged by the number of elections it loses not by the number of years it is out of power. The Liberals had only been out of power for 6 years in 1924, yet it had lost 4 elections:1918, 1922, 1923, 1924, -and it was widely seen a finished party. Indeed it never won a general election again.

    But I repeat my question: what will Labour do if it loses a fourth general election in a row? Labour constantly changed its leader 1979-97 and only returned to power after it had purged Militant -the equivalent then of Momentum. Or will Corbyn do a lap of self congratulatory honour, announce that he will carry on into his 80s and the members decide that it is the voters and not they who are at fault.?
    Well, I don't agree with your premise. As far as the man on the Clapham Omnibus is concerned, we've had a Conservative led government for seven years or so. We haven't even had the 1987 General Election in their book.

    Think of of it this way: when the Labour Party got back into power in 1997, how many of it MPs dated back to the last Labour administration? I reckon it would be fewer than 20. How many Labour MPs today were in the House in 2010. The majority of them. Change happens when people change. And the Labour Party of 2018 hasn't really changed from the one of 2010.

    And another thing... the Labour Party ran on a "hard left" platform in 1983, and didn't get that centrist in 1987. The electorate punished them for it, and they ended up with pretty derisory numbers of seats.

    If the Labour Party of 2022 loses the election with 280 seats, that's a very different outcome to if they lose it with 180 seats. In the former case, "one more heave" will likely be the mantra; in the latter, we're likely to see more radical change.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 26,201

    Awks? Seriously? How long has this been a word?
    There have always been little awks. Great awks were extinct. Until today. This looks like great awks.

    May’s far too weak to take any action against Steve Baker and Baker himself will not resign. This will pass and the accelerating degradation of public life will continue unabated. Anyone can do anything and will not be held accountable if they have the ability to cause the PM problems.

  • philiphphiliph Posts: 2,813
    edited February 1

    IanB2 said:

    stevef said:

    But if it is true that the current boundaries favour the Tories when did they change in their favour?

    If the boundaries favour the Tories how do we explain the fact that 36% voted Labour and they got a majority of 66, and in 2010 36% got the Tories no majority at all?

    And how is the point answered that if Labour seats are mainly in big cities, it takes fewer voters to elect a Labour MP than it does to elect a Tory MP.

    I refer to an article in Labour's New Statesman in 2015 which admits that the current boundaries are indeed a partial -but not total explanation -for Labour's electoral advantage. Labour does get more MPs for the same percentage of the vote than the Tories.

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/01/labours-electoral-advantage-isnt-mainly-due-boundaries

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/electoral-bias-in-the-uk-after-the-2015-general-election/
    Very simple. The collapse of the LDs has been the biggest driver of the electoral system now favouring the Tories.

    Quoting GR2005 no longer relevant.
    It is relevant to illustrate that the electoral results vary with the action of the voters. A bias today cannot be forecast to be the same bias in the future unless the voters are static and identical.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,829
    Substantial Labour gains at SNP expense would remove the Tory advantage alluded to here.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,328

    On topic, it seems unlikely that whatever the result at the next election that any swing will be on a uniform national basis. With the last election seeming to have swung constituency by constituency for Brexit-related reasons, it seems unlikely that the next election will see the current sets of marginals swing in a uniform manner.

    That’s interesting. I bet against UNS last year and it worked out quite well, but I’ve been thinking that we’re unlikely to see anything quite as severe at the next election. But I guess a lot will depend upon the circumstances in which the next election is held.
This discussion has been closed.