As for that latest poll. I read somewhere that B(N)P only became an option in the pool if they'd already hit "Other", which would probably increase their share in a straight poll (probably at the expense of conservative) - if correct.
As for the number of seats those percentages equate to. As said above, just shows how fucked up FPTP is.
Last edited by Which Tyler on Fri May 31, 2019 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Banquo wrote:
i just find it interesting why they weren't rumbled by da yoof in 2017.
We're coming back round to my persistent thesis that the electorate is collectively dumb as shit and popular vote should not be treated like it has any real wisdom.
Puja
Given up on citizens assemblies yet, then?
Hey, my favoured option has always been a benign dictator, but they're hard to find.
Banquo wrote:
i just find it interesting why they weren't rumbled by da yoof in 2017.
We're coming back round to my persistent thesis that the electorate is collectively dumb as shit and popular vote should not be treated like it has any real wisdom.
Puja
Given up on citizens assemblies yet, then?
yeah that's a gem. Fiona Bruce could be the equivalent of the speaker.
Puja wrote:It is a very interesting set of figures though. SNP would go from 35 to 53 without a change in their vote share, because Lib Dems and Brexit would take from Labour and Conservative shares in Scotland and gift them more seats with the same votes. Likewise I'll bet that a lot of the Lib Dem gains would be at the hands of Labour, but Labour would then pilfer Conservative ones by dint of being in 2nd place in seats where the B(N)P got a chunk of the vote. Amazing that Labour's core is so concentrated that they would only lose 4 seats with 22% smaller vote share.
I wonder how a Remain pact would affect those figures - you'd have to think Green would stand a chance against Labour in Bristol and Norwich if Lib Dems and Change stood behind them and if the favour was returned, you'd think there was another 4-5 seats out there in the South West and university towns for the Lib Dems to turn over.
Puja
I think that the SNP vote share is masked a bit by lumping it in with the UK figure. In the 2017 GE, the SNP dropped 13% to 37% in Scotland and lost 21 seats. The newest YouGov poll shows them regaining 7% to 44% and regaining 18 seats, so there is some degree of consistency when you throw in the other forecast changes:
SNP: 37% > 44%
SCUP: 29% > 19%
SLAB: 27% > 12%
SLD: 7% > 11%
Green: 0.2% > 6%
TBP: na > 7%
Puja wrote:It is a very interesting set of figures though. SNP would go from 35 to 53 without a change in their vote share, because Lib Dems and Brexit would take from Labour and Conservative shares in Scotland and gift them more seats with the same votes. Likewise I'll bet that a lot of the Lib Dem gains would be at the hands of Labour, but Labour would then pilfer Conservative ones by dint of being in 2nd place in seats where the B(N)P got a chunk of the vote. Amazing that Labour's core is so concentrated that they would only lose 4 seats with 22% smaller vote share.
I wonder how a Remain pact would affect those figures - you'd have to think Green would stand a chance against Labour in Bristol and Norwich if Lib Dems and Change stood behind them and if the favour was returned, you'd think there was another 4-5 seats out there in the South West and university towns for the Lib Dems to turn over.
Puja
its also interesting that Labour's potl vote has collapsed, given that their position on Brexit is much softer (well flabbier) than at the 2017 GE.
Not surprising - they pulled a massive con trick in 2017 by facing both ways at once, avoiding talking about it wherever possible, and presenting an appearance of being pro-Remain in the south and an appearance of being pro-Leave in the north. Now that they actually have taken a position in the middle, it's unsurprising that they've lost from both sides.
Puja
Talking of facing two ways at once alongside the idea the Lib Dems could do some damage in the south west amuses when the Lib Dems in the south west are so often a very different party to the one you'd find in Richmond
Banquo wrote:
its also interesting that Labour's potl vote has collapsed, given that their position on Brexit is much softer (well flabbier) than at the 2017 GE.
Not surprising - they pulled a massive con trick in 2017 by facing both ways at once, avoiding talking about it wherever possible, and presenting an appearance of being pro-Remain in the south and an appearance of being pro-Leave in the north. Now that they actually have taken a position in the middle, it's unsurprising that they've lost from both sides.
Puja
Talking of facing two ways at once alongside the idea the Lib Dems could do some damage in the south west amuses when the Lib Dems in the south west are so often a very different party to the one you'd find in Richmond
Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.
Puja wrote:
Not surprising - they pulled a massive con trick in 2017 by facing both ways at once, avoiding talking about it wherever possible, and presenting an appearance of being pro-Remain in the south and an appearance of being pro-Leave in the north. Now that they actually have taken a position in the middle, it's unsurprising that they've lost from both sides.
Puja
Talking of facing two ways at once alongside the idea the Lib Dems could do some damage in the south west amuses when the Lib Dems in the south west are so often a very different party to the one you'd find in Richmond
Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.
Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.
Talking of facing two ways at once alongside the idea the Lib Dems could do some damage in the south west amuses when the Lib Dems in the south west are so often a very different party to the one you'd find in Richmond
Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.
Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.
Given an election right now, they're a single-issue party, just the same as the B(N)P. That 24% vote share has nothing to do with policies or personalities, but simply because they are the Remain party.
A friend of mine noted on seeing this poll that this kind of thing has a tendency to snowball with FPtP - if the Lib Dems are seen as credible, they'll rise higher in the polls, and thus become more likely challengers in more constituencies, which then makes them more credible and more likely to get votes. They could peel away a lot of the Labour vote if people think they could win in their constituency.
It could be a bloody mess if they end up with 100+ MPs, all facing different directions.
Mellsblue wrote:
Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.
Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.
Given an election right now, they're a single-issue party, just the same as the B(N)P. That 24% vote share has nothing to do with policies or personalities, but simply because they are the Remain party.
A friend of mine noted on seeing this poll that this kind of thing has a tendency to snowball with FPtP - if the Lib Dems are seen as credible, they'll rise higher in the polls, and thus become more likely challengers in more constituencies, which then makes them more credible and more likely to get votes. They could peel away a lot of the Labour vote if people think they could win in their constituency.
It could be a bloody mess if they end up with 100+ MPs, all facing different directions.
Puja
Maybe they're single issue, but if you're wondering where the 20% or so of Lib Dems who'd vote for Brexit are to be found you'd probably start looking in Cornwall. The good news is the more they rise in profile the more they'll get scrutinised
Talking of facing two ways at once alongside the idea the Lib Dems could do some damage in the south west amuses when the Lib Dems in the south west are so often a very different party to the one you'd find in Richmond
Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.
Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.
Can’t say I agree. It’s not possible to get enough of the electorate by giving one message. You need to be a broad church and need a broad range of policies, well targeted, to achieve this.
Using your examples. Blair had relaxed with extreme wealth as long as they pay their (not particularly high) taxes mixed with a larger state, amongst other stuff. Cameron had austerity mixed with min wage (rebadged) and liberal stuff (hug a hoody, legalise gay marriage).
Digby wrote:
Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.
Given an election right now, they're a single-issue party, just the same as the B(N)P. That 24% vote share has nothing to do with policies or personalities, but simply because they are the Remain party.
A friend of mine noted on seeing this poll that this kind of thing has a tendency to snowball with FPtP - if the Lib Dems are seen as credible, they'll rise higher in the polls, and thus become more likely challengers in more constituencies, which then makes them more credible and more likely to get votes. They could peel away a lot of the Labour vote if people think they could win in their constituency.
It could be a bloody mess if they end up with 100+ MPs, all facing different directions.
Puja
Maybe they're single issue, but if you're wondering where the 20% or so of Lib Dems who'd vote for Brexit are to be found you'd probably start looking in Cornwall. The good news is the more they rise in profile the more they'll get scrutinised
Puja, Lib Dem aren’t single issue, though. They’re clearly Remain but that isn’t single issue. Have you learned nothing
Diggers is correct. They’re very strong in a Brexit stronghold!
You’re point about critical mass in FPtP is spot on. If this poll actually turns in to reality, things are about to get even more interesting.
Mellsblue wrote:
Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.
Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.
Can’t say I agree. It’s not possible to get enough of the electorate by giving one message. You need to be a broad church and need a broad range of policies, well targeted, to achieve this.
Using your examples. Blair had relaxed with extreme wealth as long as they pay their (not particularly high) taxes mixed with a larger state, amongst other stuff. Cameron had austerity mixed with min wage (rebadged) and liberal stuff (hug a hoody, legalise gay marriage).
Perhaps I judge them more harshly as I vote for them, but to me whilst yes you've got to appeal to as many as possible if you want a lot of votes and there's nothing wrong with a broad church anyway, the Dems have at times rather taken the piss, and gotten away with it 'cause who really cares about the Dems enough to cover them anyway?
Change UK are now back down to 5 MPs, as Heidi Allen, Chukka Umunna, Sarah Wollaston, Angela Smith, Luciana Berger, and Gavin Shuker have quit the party. No news on where they're going, but I would imagine to be independents as I doubt their previous homes would have them back.
Great job changing British politics for the better! Well done!
I remain unconcerned they've failed. if nobody was even trying that would worry me more, and I don't want nobody else to try. One merely hopes the next bunch, which might include some of the same people, do a better job of it.
I don't know that your link has worked properly. Are you referencing this?
In which case, may I suggest this analysis as proof of what a shitty system FPtP is:
Farage might like to arrantly threaten violence in the streets, but I think there very much might be if Brexit gets 22% of the vote for 4 seats, especially with Lib Dems getting 70-odd for 24%.
Puja
A shitty system indeed, and the one which has given us Brexit. Not completely convinced about those numbers though. Although I'm sure fptp will give the Tories and Labour a grotesquely disproportionate number of MPs, Brexit would do quite a bit better than 4. That website produces numbers from a swingometer but that's difficult to do if the party didn't exist last time.
Digby wrote:I remain unconcerned they've failed. if nobody was even trying that would worry me more, and I don't want nobody else to try. One merely hopes the next bunch, which might include some of the same people, do a better job of it.
Agreed - though they should always have gone and joined the lib dems, rather than forming their own party without any apparatus, to occupy a position slightly left of centre, opposing Brexit and preaching consensus politics; and bemoaning the lack of any exiting political party that did all of that.
I don't know that your link has worked properly. Are you referencing this?
In which case, may I suggest this analysis as proof of what a shitty system FPtP is:
Farage might like to arrantly threaten violence in the streets, but I think there very much might be if Brexit gets 22% of the vote for 4 seats, especially with Lib Dems getting 70-odd for 24%.
Puja
A shitty system indeed, and the one which has given us Brexit. Not completely convinced about those numbers though. Although I'm sure fptp will give the Tories and Labour a grotesquely disproportionate number of MPs, Brexit would do quite a bit better than 4. That website produces numbers from a swingometer but that's difficult to do if the party didn't exist last time.
Not sure, they don't seem to have localised support like the main parties do, instead it's a bit of a countrywide spread, which won't give results in the constituent based fptp we use.
If it weren't for the gerrymandering, Hungary's system would be quite good, I think.
Puja wrote:Change UK are now back down to 5 MPs, as Heidi Allen, Chukka Umunna, Sarah Wollaston, Angela Smith, Luciana Berger, and Gavin Shuker have quit the party. No news on where they're going, but I would imagine to be independents as I doubt their previous homes would have them back.
Great job changing British politics for the better! Well done!
Puja wrote:
I don't know that your link has worked properly. Are you referencing this?
In which case, may I suggest this analysis as proof of what a shitty system FPtP is:
Farage might like to arrantly threaten violence in the streets, but I think there very much might be if Brexit gets 22% of the vote for 4 seats, especially with Lib Dems getting 70-odd for 24%.
Puja
A shitty system indeed, and the one which has given us Brexit. Not completely convinced about those numbers though. Although I'm sure fptp will give the Tories and Labour a grotesquely disproportionate number of MPs, Brexit would do quite a bit better than 4. That website produces numbers from a swingometer but that's difficult to do if the party didn't exist last time.
Not sure, they don't seem to have localised support like the main parties do, instead it's a bit of a countrywide spread, which won't give results in the constituent based fptp we use.
If it weren't for the gerrymandering, Hungary's system would be quite good, I think.
Agreed, Brexit may not have the strongholds that Labour and Conservative have but it's support wouldn't be spread out uniformly as this kind of swingometer calculation (presumably) assumes. So it would do somewhat better*.
*if it continues to poll well after Brexit...which is (I hope) unlikely.
Puja wrote:Change UK are now back down to 5 MPs, as Heidi Allen, Chukka Umunna, Sarah Wollaston, Angela Smith, Luciana Berger, and Gavin Shuker have quit the party. No news on where they're going, but I would imagine to be independents as I doubt their previous homes would have them back.
Great job changing British politics for the better! Well done!
Puja
Interesting. I guess it will all become clear, but are these leavers the ones who want to join (or sort-of join) the Lib Dems, or is it what remains of Change UK? From their earlier comments it seemed that Umunna was less keen than Allen to have much to do with the Lib Dems.
Digby wrote:Boris is loud but with nothing to actually say, Raab is more Brexity than Brexit, and Gove is a coke fiend. Anyone surprised?
Boris is just a showman. Sadly that will probably be enough to win him the election as the membership (and MPs) will believe that he has enough personality to blitz Corbyn.
I like Rory Stewart, but its feel a bit early for him.
