RugbyRebels

Puja wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 10:26 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 9:42 am

Zhivago wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 8:31 amThere's a lot of spin about Starmer doing great, but actually this is a poor performance. He is just lucky that the Tories imploded. If they don't bring in PR, the Tories will be back in power soon enough, probably after a merger with the far-right Reform party.

I don't see why he wouldn't have run a different campaign if the tories hadn't spent the entirety of his time as leader of the opposition imploding.

The labour campaign was absolutely to avoid giving the right wing press anything at all to shoot at them; because it was always a landslide win.

This election was always "get the tories out", and who could provide a new / temporary home for those tory voters. It's those voters Labour were chasing, to secure a big majority. I'm sure they don't mind LibDem and Green taking a few seats.
This is about as good a result as anyone could have hoped for, and the low turnout is, IMO, a result of it being a foregone conclusion.

That's certainly part of it, but there's also part that Starmer failed to get his base out in any way shape or form. I agree that he needed to provide a new/temporary home for centre ground voters, but he went further than that, spending a lot of his time chasing Sun and Times readers, looking to appeal to bluer and bluer segments of the electorate at diminishing returns.

You can't argue with the results of 170 seat majority, but he did also achieve 4% lower vote share than the deeply flawed Corbyn did with an ambitiously socialist manifesto that inspired hope. That 170 is built on sand - he's alienated a chunk of his base and, if he doesn't please the people who loaned him their vote, he could find himself in the same position as the Boris majority in 5 years' time.

I remain hopeful though that he will pivot to more ambitious policy-making now that the election is done. Surely he must do.

Puja

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 10:07 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 9:42 am

Mikey Brown wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 8:54 am I mean if Farage hadn’t come back would anything even have changed? Starmer can’t be under the impression he has done this himself can he?

Given that a labour landslide was a foregone conclusion before Farage came back

It was? I’m fuzzy on the timeline.

I’m not suggesting you simply tally up Con + Reform, but I’m not convinced that being incompetent (or just a total c***) was actually that much of a deal breaker for a lot of (traditionally) Tory voters.

Maybe I’m just struggling with the idea of eventual Reform voters who would have gone Lib Dem / Labour otherwise.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 12:34 pm That was quite a night. Various thoughts:

Broadly speaking this is the best the country can hope for (other than the Tories down to 3rd place, maybe).

It was great to see a Truss, Rees-Mogg, Liam Fox and Fabricant go down, but on balance, probably a shame (am I really saying this?) the more moderate Mordaunt went too:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... heir-seats

Great that Corbyn won (with 49% of the vote) over Labour. And a shame that Labour's underhand actions in Chingford allowed IDS to survive (as well as robbing parliament of Faiza Shaheen). A shame too that Wes Streeting just held off an independent by 500 votes. Ah well.

Good to see the SNP cut down to the size they deserve. And nice that the Greens are no longer a complete joke, with 4 MPs and plenty of second places. It's a pleasure to see Wales as a Tory-free zone .

Compared with the exit poll, Reform's 4 MPs is a relief, but I was gutted to see Anderson win (I'd already accepted that Farage couldn't be stopped )

It was a landslide in seats but not in votes. Labour were only slightly up in vote what from 2019 and down from 2017. So this was not about what Labour did (which was as little as possible in fact) but what the Tories and Farage did. The Tories set this up with austerity and Brexit and internal division, then finished up with chaos and economic disaster. Then Farage put them to the sword by doing what he chose not to do in 2019.

Labour now needs to deliver noticeable improvements to people's lives in the next 5 years or this result will be in jeopardy. And if the Tories can neutralize Farage or bring him onboard, and stop splitting the right/far-right vote, Labour will have a much, much harder fight.

What the Tories do now is huge and totally in the balance. If they want to win again they have to stop Farage from splitting the vote. But what does Farage want? Can he be bought off? Taking him in or merging with Reform means Farage taking over the party so that would obviously be a disaster for anyone who doesn't like living under fascism (and would obviously be a disaster for any other Tory with leadership ambitions). But if Farage can't be bought and is in it for the long haul of destroying the Tories and taking their place as the party of the right then they have the choice: centre or right? Their membership would obviously choose right, as would a number of big figures (who have unfortunately found themselves in safe-ish seats), although there are some more moderate voices (and here it is probably a pity that Mordaunt lost her seat).

If Farage persists, the Tories are in big trouble whichever way they go. Personally I think they can't compete with Farage on the right - people always prefer the authentic version over the copy - and anyway there are only so many anti-immigrant/racist votes available. But tracking left they bump into Starmer on the right edge of centre. It's tough, and success rests on external events. But just as Starmer has cashed in on Tory failure, they would cash in if Labour fails to deliver. Obviously (IMO) it's better for the country if they track left and leave far-right arguments on the fringes of politics rather than in the shadow cabinet, but what happens depends on a few personalities who are positioning themselves at this very moment.

Zhivago wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 6:04 pm btw did anyone else find it amusing how during Sunak's departure speech outside No. 10, his wife stands behind him holding an umbrella? Lesson learnt I guess.

Banquo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 4:42 pm tactical voting masterclass too

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 6:49 pm

Zhivago wrote: ↑Fri Jul 05, 2024 6:04 pm btw did anyone else find it amusing how during Sunak's departure speech outside No. 10, his wife stands behind him holding an umbrella? Lesson learnt I guess.

Always feel a bit for the spouse in that situation. Just stand there and wait for the waffle to finish.

cashead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 4:17 am Well, if one is not happy about the government they ended up with, then perhaps, one could have mustered up enough fucks on the relevant day to go out and vote.

You end up with the government you didn't vote for, and unlike those who did vote, you don't get to complain either.

cashead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 4:17 am Well, if one is not happy about the government they ended up with, then perhaps, one could have mustered up enough fucks on the relevant day to go out and vote.

You end up with the government you didn't vote for, and unlike those who did vote, you don't get to complain either.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 7:30 am

cashead wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 4:17 am Well, if one is not happy about the government they ended up with, then perhaps, one could have mustered up enough fucks on the relevant day to go out and vote.

You end up with the government you didn't vote for, and unlike those who did vote, you don't get to complain either.

Agreed. I think a lot of voters can’t find a party that completely aligns with their views so don’t bother voting. I don’t think PR would change that. The ability to compromise needs to make a comeback.

Tactical voting is a pain in the arse to be fair. But if you can’t be arsed to vote out a hugely unpopular party then you have no right to complain if it somehow remains in power.

I suspect many of the absentees this time around were lifelong Tory voters who couldn’t vote for the shambles their parties become but wouldn’t touch reform with a sterilised barge pole. I’m not so worried about that as a one off but it would be more concerning if that trend were to be repeated.

Also worth considering that the turnout was dreadful in 2001. Since the Tories were experimenting with reform like policies at that point that might again be no surprise. The stat for Tory MPs shouldn’t be the rise of reform but perhaps
More the number of Tory voters who just didn’t bother and could be tempted back.

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:04 am

Starmwr and Davey played a blinder under the rules of the system.

Donny osmond wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 8:45 am I'm finding the vote share chat more than a little tedious, and the suggestion that it points to a lack of legitimacy is frankly crackers.

Winning 34% of the vote in a 2 horse race **might** indicate ... something. Winning 34% of the vote when there are 6 or 7 parties to choose from is a genuine result.

Everyone who voted for a party other than Conservative knew that they were contributing to a Labour win. Those Reform voters weren't voting Reform to get a Rf-Con coalition government, they knew they were contributing to a Labour win.

To ignore the multiple nuances involved in a GE and simply look at a 34% vote share as if it were only a 2 horse race, to me that's a completely illegitimate analysis

Donny osmond wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 8:45 am I'm finding the vote share chat more than a little tedious, and the suggestion that it points to a lack of legitimacy is frankly crackers.

Winning 34% of the vote in a 2 horse race **might** indicate ... something. Winning 34% of the vote when there are 6 or 7 parties to choose from is a genuine result.

Everyone who voted for a party other than Conservative knew that they were contributing to a Labour win. Those Reform voters weren't voting Reform to get a Rf-Con coalition government, they knew they were contributing to a Labour win.

To ignore the multiple nuances involved in a GE and simply look at a 34% vote share as if it were only a 2 horse race, to me that's a completely illegitimate analysis

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:22 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:04 am

Starmwr and Davey played a blinder under the rules of the system.

Nobody should be denying that, its self evident, terrific campaigning and coordinating/capitalising on tactical voting. Bit like Brexit . played the system rules.

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 10:52 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:22 am

Which Tyler wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:04 am

Starmwr and Davey played a blinder under the rules of the system.

Nobody should be denying that, its self evident, terrific campaigning and coordinating/capitalising on tactical voting. Bit like Brexit . played the system rules.

Except for false claims
Of £350m a week

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 10:53 am

Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 10:52 am

Banquo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:22 am

Nobody should be denying that, its self evident, terrific campaigning and coordinating/capitalising on tactical voting. Bit like Brexit . played the system rules.

Except for false claims
Of £350m a week

so no false claims by Labour or the libral demcrats ? . i was mildly joking.