UK - December 2019 General Election

[jimbob]

I remember having this argument on the forum at the time of that referendum with people who said that AV is not PR and could even be worse than FPTP so they weren't going to vote for it. The problem was that if the referendum returned a "no change" result then for the next 50 years we'd be told that we'd had our chance and we'd opted for FPTP.

Exactly.

Such views really frustrate me. I've never voted for a party or outcome I agree with wholeheartedly - however "Perfect is the enemy of good enough" is something that seems obvious to me, but anathema to many.

 

[Ulf Nereng]

The BBC is a corrupt hive, the sooner it's dismantled the better.

Their job is to ask hard questions to those in power. Not to be impartial between those in power and those not in power. Those not in power haven't been in a position to promise one thing and deliver another (for several years). The BBC is doing a good job.

 

[LondonJohn]

Their job is to ask hard questions to those in power. Not to be impartial between those in power and those not in power. Those not in power haven't been in a position to promise one thing and deliver another (for several years). The BBC is doing a good job.

Agreed. I don't see institutionalised bias one way or the other within the BBC (and in fact I think it constantly takes proactive and retroactive steps to try to ensure neutrality and equality - though of course there are occasionally mis-steps).

However, what I DO see with the BBC is an outdated and moribund business model. The BBC must and will change dramatically over the next 10-15 years, both in terms of the funding mechanism and in terms of the scale and scope of the output. The licence fee is unsustainable and now not fit for purpose in a multi-channel multi-platform digital content delivery world. Already parts of the BBC such as its web presence and its news content are clearly distorting the market and acting anti-competitively. My guess is that before long the licence fee will be scrapped and replaced with a small additional personal tax burden which will be redistributed to the BBC to provide basic TV/radio news, current affairs, educational and (some) children's programming (with careful guarding against anticompetitive practices). There will then be subscription services for things like entertainment and sport, and the BBC web output will have to be entirely funded internally by the BBC.

Also, it is not the absolute right of the BBC to actually hold interviews with whomever they wish. That's not how it works. Any minister, politician and political party is entirely free to refuse or accept BBC interview requests as he/she/it chooses. Of course a refusal (if/when made public) will have a certain amount of repercussions, which the refuser would need to factor into the equation. Ministers and senior politicians are only required to be held to account either in the Commons chamber, in select committees, or by the ballot box.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Well some are certainly stupid. I have been left dizzy when a woman from Blyth said she voted for "Boris" because they need more money in the north!

I'm from there (literally born a few miles) from Blyth and it is an area that has been starved of resources and government money for decades of Tory rule. Goodness me it is fair to say that Tory governments since the turn of the LAST but one century (1900s) have dumped all over the area and the people.

Ashington, Choppington, Stakeford, Blyth travel up there if you want to see what decades of neglect looks like. And she thinks a Tory government will bring more money into the north.

They've obliterated a lot of places, mate, and they've hooked all of the working-class people who have given up on Labour simply because they didn't agree with Corbyn, a lot of the same people who think Brexit means "no Muslims" and all of this other ridiculous nonsense. It's a shame, because these are the people who will be hit the hardest. My parents didn't like Corbyn, but they voted Labour all the same, and thankfully, the vast majority of Liverpool did the same, but sadly it wasn't enough.

My mum was recently in the Royal hospital in town, and just sitting there with my dad, looking about the place, no beds, people waiting in corridors on trollies, ceilings leaking...the place should've been knocked down 2 years ago. The Tories are rapists, and I don't understand anyone who would or could vote for them. Boris is the grimmest of them all, a toff twat with not even the most basic of morals. Shame on you, Britain.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I had a hollow laugh when food bank volunteers were reporting that people attending food banks were declaring, I'm voting for Boris!

I can't quite work it out myself. I'm assuming it's a combination of anger, disillusionment, naivety, and outright ignorance.

Watching former Labour voters on the news talking about how they'd try something different, lol. That's like saying, I don't fancy pie and mash tonight, love, I think I'll try arsenic.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Someone should have put that on the side of a big red bus.

Most definitely, lol. In Liverpool, we did have a group putting stickers about that read: Don't be a nonce, vote Labour.

Sadly, for some, the urge to be a nonce was much too great.

 

[Worm]

Take a look at the amount of votes that Labour lost and compare them with the amount of votes the Con gained and the BRX gained.

<snip>

Labour lost a lot of critical seats that they have held for a significant time because previous voters instead gave their votes to both the Brexit Party and the Conservative party, but also to a lesser degree the Liberal Democratic party and (to an even lesser degree) the greens. Had the Brexit Party not stood any candidates there, it's quite possible they would've been able to keep enough support to retain some of the seats they lost.

Edit: The amount of votes gained by the Conservative Party and The Brexit Party was both quite often around 50% of the total votes that Labour lost.

I know it's an older post, but I'm just catching up and I wan't to add a note of caution to this.

This could be the case, but you can't tell just from the raw numbers. They may relate to significantly differing groups of voters. They may not - but that's the point - you can't tell without a lot more information.

A change in number, or proportion, of voters may not relate to people voting for a different party. It may relate to different people voting. Indeed, in every constituency it will be a mixture of those factors. How much is down to people changing their vote to a different party is hard to nail down.

I'm aware that there have been some surveys done in specific areas to identify where previous Labour voters changed to Conservative, but I don't think that's been done universally, I'm not sure how robust those surveys were, and I think it's dangerous to assume that reasons will be the same across every area.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Yes, and you should rejoice that now the Tories have been returned with a healthy majority, and can ignore the bleating remainer MPs, they will, at last, be able to deliver it.

I hope you've got some private healthcare, shortcrust.

 

[angrysoba]

I know it's an older post, but I'm just catching up and I wan't to add a note of caution to this.

This could be the case, but you can't tell just from the raw numbers. They may relate to significantly differing groups of voters. They may not - but that's the point - you can't tell without a lot more information.

A change in number, or proportion, of voters may not relate to people voting for a different party. It may relate to different people voting. Indeed, in every constituency it will be a mixture of those factors. How much is down to people changing their vote to a different party is hard to nail down.

I'm aware that there have been some surveys done in specific areas to identify where previous Labour voters changed to Conservative, but I don't think that's been done universally, I'm not sure how robust those surveys were, and I think it's dangerous to assume that reasons will be the same across every area.

It will be interesting to see how much the Brexit Party made a difference to the number of seats. But in many of those seats there were already large numbers of people who had voted UKIP, and this time round voted Green, Lib Dems and various independents. The stories of those who were out canvassing for Labour have said repeatedly that it was Corbyn who put them off.

 

[LondonJohn]

Most definitely, lol. In Liverpool, we did have a group putting stickers about that read: Don't be a nonce, vote Labour.

Sadly, for some, the urge to be a nonce was much too great.

Yes, with this sort of activity from such a group, it's a complete mystery as to why Labour didn't clean up across the country.....

 

[LondonJohn]

It will be interesting to see how much the Brexit Party made a difference to the number of seats. But in many of those seats there were already large numbers of people who had voted UKIP, and this time round voted Green, Lib Dems and various independents. The stories of those who were out canvassing for Labour have said repeatedly that it was Corbyn who put them off.

Yes. And I think a deeper dive into the "Corbyn factor" would probably reveal that there are actually two parts to it: 1) the man himself, and the fact that people couldn't see him as the sort of dynamic statesman in charge of the country; and 2) the political doctrine and policies that Corbyn (and his "top team rolleyes) stood for. Much as socialists like to pretend otherwise, people on the whole prefer less state intervention, lower taxes, and more personal responsibility. I think many people also saw the doomsday rhetoric about the NHS for what it was, and policies such as "free high-speed broadband for all" were beyond loony-left.

There's absolutely room for a moderate, centre-left Labour* party challenging (and very possibly succeeding) for government. The sort of party and policies which really does represent the views, desires and fears of a large portion of the UK electorate in the 21st Century. Socialism has failed in literally every single country in the world that has tried it since around 1960 (and the only countries in which it had any (false) semblance of success for any extended period were totalitarian dictatorships....). It should be consigned to the dustbin of history.


* Though as I've written before, I think the "Labour" name and brand might now carry too much baggage in relation to "the struggle of the working man against his capitalist oppressors" and so on - I'd argue that the party might stand to benefit (along with the election of a centrist top team) from some form of name change.

 

[a_unique_person]

They've obliterated a lot of places, mate, and they've hooked all of the working-class people who have given up on Labour simply because they didn't agree with Corbyn, a lot of the same people who think Brexit means "no Muslims" and all of this other ridiculous nonsense. It's a shame, because these are the people who will be hit the hardest. My parents didn't like Corbyn, but they voted Labour all the same, and thankfully, the vast majority of Liverpool did the same, but sadly it wasn't enough.



My mum was recently in the Royal hospital in town, and just sitting there with my dad, looking about the place, no beds, people waiting in corridors on trollies, ceilings leaking...the place should've been knocked down 2 years ago. The Tories are rapists, and I don't understand anyone who would or could vote for them. Boris is the grimmest of them all, a toff twat with not even the most basic of morals. Shame on you, Britain.

It's all from the proven playbook of the Australian and American conserve parties. Appeal to feelings and disregard logic and facts. Refer to my sig. Imelda Marcos had it worked out years ago.

 

[jimbob]

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...didnt-convert-that-into-a-majority-for-change

He says that he takes his responsibility for the results, and that he has travelled up and down the country listening to people, but nowhere does he acknowledge that he is, to a large degree because of his person, the major reason for why they lost so heavily.

Instead he blames the "billionaire owned media" and the party's Brexit policy (of which he had a great influence on). Also, he's proud of their "radical" manifesto and even-though they lost heavily it's something to be proud of. The fact that no one cared about it, and that it will be of no consequence, is apparently not important.

This is basically the Corbynista's "official" narrative of the election. It's better to be "in the right" rather than actually having a chance of accomplishing something, or anything.

Exactly,

 

[GrandMasterFox]

Okay, everyone calm down.
Everything makes perfectly sense now.

Uri Geller just said that the reason Johnson won is because he gave him a spoon filled with positive energies.

 

[ohms]

That explains why #spoonnonce was trending on Twitter yesterday

 

[Darat]

The only good thing I think we will see happening in the short term is that the reactionary party in NI has had its influence reduced and there is now more chance of NI getting an effective government that isn't obsessed with who puts what in which hole and women's bodies.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

The only good thing I think we will see happening in the short term is that the reactionary party in NI has had its influence reduced and there is now more chance of NI getting an effective government that isn't obsessed with who puts what in which hole and women's bodies.

I don't think you really understand Northern Ireland. Neither of those issues were particularly contentious, and didn't bring down the assembly. The really important things are which flags can fly on which buildings and when, and whether anyone should speak Irish.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Okay, everyone calm down.
Everything makes perfectly sense now.

Uri Geller just said that the reason Johnson won is because he gave him a spoon filled with positive energies.

That's much more than a spoonful of BS.

 

[trustbutverify]

Okay, everyone calm down.
Everything makes perfectly sense now.

Uri Geller just said that the reason Johnson won is because he gave him a spoon filled with positive energies.

So Hitler was a Zionist and a magic spoon killed Corbyn.

Interesting election cycle.

 

[Azrael 5]

How does this work Uri? Not long ago he was "making" Theresa May stop Brexit which would suggest anti Tory,no?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...cally-spoons-churchill-cadillac-a8836181.html