• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Predict the UK election result.

Predict the result of UK General Election 2017

  • Conservative majority of 100+

    Votes: 7 10.9%

  • Conservative majority of 76 to 100

    Votes: 4 6.3%

  • Conservative majority of 51 to 75

    Votes: 9 14.1%

  • Conservative majority of 26 to 50

    Votes: 7 10.9%

  • Conservative majority of 1 to 25

    Votes: 14 21.9%

  • Hung parliament

    Votes: 19 29.7%

  • Labour majority of 1 to 25

    Votes: 3 4.7%

  • Labour majority of 26 to 50

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Labour majority of 51 to 75

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Labour majority of 76 to 100

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Labour majority of 100+

    Votes: 1 1.6%
  • Total voters
    64
  • Poll closed .
The Don said:
Depends on what you consider the second tier and whether you restrict your analysis to England. It's certainly true in England, but there is currently another, geographically succinct, party which has a fair number of MPs ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not allowed to mention them. The wrath of the nationalist gods descends on me if I do.
 
Ethan Thane Athen said:
Oh and Lib Dems* (who, according to a test I did, I'm naturally more inclined to) may well get a smaller number of seats. Amazing how a party that was on the rise and in a country that has been desperately looking for an alternative to the big two, has fallen so far due to (IMHO) one spectacularly bad decision. No, not going in to coalition or the string of being conned by the Tories to always be the ones giving bad news, whilst Tory ministers were always trotted out to give the good stuff, I think it was purely and simply Tuition Fees.

This was seen as such a massive betrayal of a really clear promise. Clegg could have got away with abstaining but would obviously have been far better voting against. It would have had no material effect on the outcome and he could even have indicated tacit understanding along the lines of 'Having seen the books, I can understand why they feel the need to do this but I gave my word and I can't in all conscience betray the people who voted for me on that understanding'. Then some better marketing on how they'd 'moderated' other Govt agendas and they could have built to the next election. As it was, they looked like lapdogs and that one clear issue proved it.

*I think Farron has performed fairly well but I can't reconcile some of his views as 'Liberal'. Seems more like a soft Tory to me...
Click to expand...

I have a rather difficult decision to make on Thursday on whether I employ my tactical vote for the lib dems or not. I promised never to do so after voting for them in 2010. If I thought it would make a difference I probably would hold my nose and do it but given that our ukip candidate has been suspended for being too racist even for ukip I think the little englander and casual racist vote will see a Tory landslide

That being the case I might as well vote Green although they have as much chance of winning as I do to be honest.
 
NWO Sentryman said:
In a second round system a lot of snp and liberal voters would probably back Corbyn. It would be close but I don't see Tory victory assured in that scenario.
Click to expand...

I think it depends on if you are talking about a PR system as well as a run-off system. Because it seems pretty obvious that the Tories will get a majority of seats straight off.

But then you could ask what would happen if we had a PR system to begin with.

We don't really know, but presumably the gains in seats that proponents of PR would like to see would be wiped out if there was a second-round run-off rendering it pointless.
 
As Tim Farron was mentioned here, I thought it would be amusing to post this clip, which looks at the speaker of the House of Commons maybe making a veiled insult to the Lib Dem leader:



Yes, it is going back a bit, but I thought it vitally important to show just what is at stake. Win a seat in your constituency and you too could be bellowing with the best of them in the H of P.
 
MikeG said:
I rather think you know what I meant. Ukip got about 13% of the national vote last time out. They'll get less than 5% this time.The Lib Dems were in the government before last, and may be down to 1 or 2 MPs this time. The second tier political forces have evaporated.
Click to expand...

And UKIP got how many MPs?

Percentage of vote isn't really reflected well in terms of influence on who forms the government in our FPTP system; which is why we've only ever really had the two choices in modern times, Labour or Conservative government.
 
Darat said:
And UKIP got how many MPs?

Percentage of vote isn't really reflected well in terms of influence on who forms the government in our FPTP system; which is why we've only ever really had the two choices in modern times, Labour or Conservative government.
Click to expand...

Well yes. But I still have no idea why you would challenge my statement that we were on the verge of reverting entirely to two party politics, when quite clearly we have had a third party (or more) at least in the conversation for the last couple of decades. It was a harmless and correct, indeed incontrovertible statement, and I shouldn't have to be defending it.
 
Darat said:
Whilst I think that did create an overall impression of "can't be trusted" in the end it was shown that Cameron and Clegg were in fact brothers by different mothers. Cameron and Clegg were/are progressive liberals who by dint of very astute political strategy managed to "takeover" their respective parties and enact neoliberal policies.

It will take some time for the Liberals to be again seen to be different to the Tories, obviously the Tories are helping with this as they are busy throwing off the shackles of Cameron and reverting to type.
Click to expand...

Yes that's a fair point.
 
Ethan Thane Athen said:
Yes that's a fair point.
Click to expand...

Only if you accept the caricature of the Conservative party presented by Darat. Personally, I don't think there is a "type" to revert to in their ranks, as the range of political views in the party is pretty wide, and always has been. But maybe this is a conversation for the other thread, not the "predict the result" thread.
 
The Don said:
As the nasty party determined to curtail human rights ;)
Click to expand...

"And I mean doing more to restrict the freedom and movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they are a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court.

"And if our human rights laws get in the way of doing it, we will change the law so we can do it."

Ouch. At least Bush had the courtesy of establishing a prison for these people outside of jurisdiction of US constitution. It was a nasty legal shenanigan, but one that did not threaten a slippery slope by anywhere near as much as this.

Theresa May appears to be a mixture of what was said about George W. Bush and what Donald J. Trump is. Add windshield wipers from the car that played Knight Rider and you have yourself a composite Lucifer incarnate, in the female form.

McHrozni
 
McHrozni said:
"And I mean doing more to restrict the freedom and movements of terrorist suspects when we have enough evidence to know they are a threat, but not enough evidence to prosecute them in full in court.

"And if our human rights laws get in the way of doing it, we will change the law so we can do it."

Ouch. At least Bush had the courtesy of establishing a prison for these people outside of jurisdiction of US constitution. It was a nasty legal shenanigan, but one that did not threaten a slippery slope by anywhere near as much as this.

Theresa May appears to be a mixture of what was said about George W. Bush and what Donald J. Trump is. Add windshield wipers from the car that played Knight Rider and you have yourself a composite Lucifer incarnate, in the female form.

McHrozni
Click to expand...

I don't understand why she's talking about such powers. She's happy to trample on the human rights of people like Tommy Robinson for simply speaking out against Islam (closing his businesses, freezing his money, falsely imprisoning him, arresting him repeatedly to prevent him speaking at marches, banning him from areas of the country for no reason, banning him from social media, repeatedly raiding his house for no reason, threatening his wife, even trying to have him killed) yet when she's confronted with actual terrorists it all must be done according to the law. Give me a break.
 
baron said:
I don't understand why she's talking about such powers. She's happy to trample on the human rights of people like Tommy Robinson for simply speaking out against Islam (closing his businesses, freezing his money, falsely imprisoning him, arresting him repeatedly to prevent him speaking at marches, banning him from areas of the country for no reason, banning him from social media, repeatedly raiding his house for no reason, threatening his wife, even trying to have him killed) yet when she's confronted with actual terrorists it all must be done according to the law. Give me a break.
Click to expand...

Near as I can tell Tommy Robinson was penalized lawfully.

McHrozni
 
Don't know who voted for Labour majority but I wonder if they know that Labour have to achieve about 10-13% more of the popular vote than the Tories to achieve that?

I kind of had that effect in the back of my head somewhere but the number came up today somewhere else and I was surprised by just how large it is. It really does make a Labour government a hell of an achievement and helps explain why we seem to get Tory government in perpetuity barring blips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom