UK General Election

MikeG said:
ETA Don't forget it was leading Victorian industrialists who led the way in changing employment conditions. The Garden City movement, model village movement, all started by Cadbury at Bournville, were all begun by some of the major entrepreneurs of the day who build superb accommodation with the first public parks, swimming pools, and so on in a huge improvement on the employment conditions which had previously prevailed. Let's not slur the Victorians erroneously.
Click to expand...

Except that councils seems to be cutting back on a lot of those amenities. Andrew Carnegie, for example, gifted library facilities for "the people" all over the place, most of which were subsumed by the local councils which are now closing them.
 
baron said:
I wouldn't trust anything that comes from that leftist (virtual) rag, described by Private Eye as a 'pisspoor Corbynite clickbait factory'.
Click to expand...

As opposed to the Eye, that well known bastion of accuracy in reporting and freedom from bias?

McHrozni said:
We can deduce some of that from information within the article. From the link above:

But the impact of this registration will only happen if people actually turn out to vote. In 2015, 70% of young people registered to vote. But only 43% actually voted.

This implies about three in five will turn out to vote. I'd reckon that unusually high registration drive also implies a higher voter participation as well, but that's nothing more than speculation.

As for who they will vote for, a high turnout of non-voters just about never favors the incumbents. If the numbers are true the greatest beneficiaries will most likely be Labour and LibDems. The question is how much benefit will they glean, it could easily be a dud, less than voter apathy of regular voters will be.



The real question, I think, is how strong the effect will be. The youth vote could be doubled from past elections (to 86%). That could well be tectonic for British politics. Whether it is achievable or not I have no idea.

McHrozni
Click to expand...

Given the UK's broken electoral system massive voter registration and turnout matters very little compared to where it happens. While a sudden surge to Labour or the LibDems by young voters could prevent a massive Tory victory by holding seats the Cons might otherwise hope to win unless the swing is in the right marginals it won't have any effect on the overall result.

I still predict a massacre by the Tories because Corbyn is so useless and the LibDems are bunch of non-entities with a piss poor record in government (to borrow a phrase from the Eye).
 
McHrozni said:
We can deduce some of that from information within the article. From the link above:

But the impact of this registration will only happen if people actually turn out to vote. In 2015, 70% of young people registered to vote. But only 43% actually voted.

This implies about three in five will turn out to vote. I'd reckon that unusually high registration drive also implies a higher voter participation as well, but that's nothing more than speculation.

As for who they will vote for, a high turnout of non-voters just about never favors the incumbents. If the numbers are true the greatest beneficiaries will most likely be Labour and LibDems. The question is how much benefit will they glean, it could easily be a dud, less than voter apathy of regular voters will be.



The real question, I think, is how strong the effect will be. The youth vote could be doubled from past elections (to 86%). That could well be tectonic for British politics. Whether it is achievable or not I have no idea.

McHrozni
Click to expand...

As others said too it all depends where they are. If they are inner city youths in Labour constituencies then it doesn't make any difference at all.

If they are all going to vote Lib Dem in constituencies where its a fight between Con and Lab or Labour where its Lib Dem v Con then again it'll make no difference.

So it's almost impossible to predict without more granular information on where these new voters are.
 
Camillus said:
Given the UK's broken electoral system massive voter registration and turnout matters very little compared to where it happens. While a sudden surge to Labour or the LibDems by young voters could prevent a massive Tory victory by holding seats the Cons might otherwise hope to win unless the swing is in the right marginals it won't have any effect on the overall result.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. Direct representation plus first past the post voting is a Bad thing.

One more thing it can affect is Scotland. It is conceivable SNP will also receive the benefits of the upswing. They're a solid Bremain party, which is an issue youngsters broke almost 3:1 in favor on the referendum. It is therefore conceivable they will benefit from the surge.

I still predict a massacre by the Tories because Corbyn is so useless and the LibDems are bunch of non-entities with a piss poor record in government (to borrow a phrase from the Eye).
Click to expand...

It does seem most likely at this point. I'm hoping for a major surprise, but that's because I'm an incurable optimist, not because there is a realistic chance of it happening. :o

McHrozni
 
Camillus said:
As opposed to the Eye, that well known bastion of accuracy in reporting and freedom from bias?
Click to expand...

Well maybe criticism from the well-known leftist Owen Jones?

[The Canary] really promotes conspiracy theories and a lot of things that just aren't right. I worry about the Canary-isation of the left, where it ends up in a bizarre sub-culture that anyone who doesn't agree is seen as part of a conspiracy.
Click to expand...

It's renowed as one of the least reliable, biased and outright nonsensical media websites going.
 
McHrozni said:
Could one of our resident Brits weigh on this news? Thanks :)

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/04/23/young-people-nasty-surprise-sleeves-theresa-may/

Theresa May might be in store for a nasty surprise from young people in the UK. Huge numbers of them are registering to vote. And if they actually cast their ballots, they could have a massive impact on the outcome of the general election.
Click to expand...

The more people that turn out to vote the better. Though I am likely to be away working on polling day and I live in one of the safest Tory seats in the country.

I don't want to vote Conservative, Labour are a shower of incompetents who couldn't run a bath, never mind a country, I was a lifelong LibDem voter, but i) they have zero chance of winning here and ii) I wouldn't want to see them elected right now anyway given their views on Brexit.

So I am probably not going to vote. I think there are a fair number of other disenfranchised voters like me, which tends to favour the tories, so I think voter turnout will decline and May will win a Landslide majority.

LibDems will win a few more seats, but not enough to make much of a difference, Labour will have to sack Corbyn after the worst Labour polling results in living memory.

What happens in Scotland is the only interesting thing. Either the SNP will get more or less the same number of seats as they have now and will proceed with independance, or they'll lose a significant amount and indyref2 will never happen.

Hopefully once the dust settles we'll at the very least have an opposition party worthy of the name.
 
baron said:
Well maybe criticism from the well-known leftist Owen Jones?



It's renowed as one of the least reliable, biased and outright nonsensical media websites going.
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't disagree that the Canary is pure trash propaganda but I found it amusing that you consider the Eye a source worth quoting in an attack featuring a claim of bias.
 
Ambrosia said:
The more people that turn out to vote the better. Though I am likely to be away working on polling day and I live in one of the safest Tory seats in the country.

I don't want to vote Conservative, Labour are a shower of incompetents who couldn't run a bath, never mind a country, I was a lifelong LibDem voter, but i) they have zero chance of winning here and ii) I wouldn't want to see them elected right now anyway given their views on Brexit.

So I am probably not going to vote. I think there are a fair number of other disenfranchised voters like me, which tends to favour the tories, so I think voter turnout will decline and May will win a Landslide majority.

LibDems will win a few more seats, but not enough to make much of a difference, Labour will have to sack Corbyn after the worst Labour polling results in living memory.

What happens in Scotland is the only interesting thing. Either the SNP will get more or less the same number of seats as they have now and will proceed with independance, or they'll lose a significant amount and indyref2 will never happen.

Hopefully once the dust settles we'll at the very least have an opposition party worthy of the name.
Click to expand...

As a Labour party member I have to say that I'm looking at the silver lining in all this. May is going to get a thumping majority and push through hard Brexit but Corbyn will be gone and the incompetents who couldn't unseat him are probably going to take a hammering too.

That means that by 2027 the fallout from Brexit will be thoroughly eating the Tories, who will have to shoulder the blame for everything (unless something very surprising happens), and a resurgent Labour party will have a chance at undoing some of the mess using a centre-Left approach with perhaps some good old state ownership of the essentials (trains, power, water) thrown in.

I might be a bit delusional but I live in hope.
 
Information Analyst said:
Except that councils seems to be cutting back on a lot of those amenities. Andrew Carnegie, for example, gifted library facilities for "the people" all over the place, most of which were subsumed by the local councils which are now closing them.
Click to expand...

True, but doesn't speak to the point I was making, which was that the Victorian Industrialists weren't always the villains they are painted.
 
Rolfe said:
And is anything of that nature likely to be built by anyone in the 21st century?
Click to expand...

Not in Britain, because Planning laws have changed dramatically. It requires legislation to get re-zoning of agricultural land on the necessary scale to build new towns. Private businesses are no longer able to buy up some farms and start building whatever they want. This is a good thing.
 
Camillus said:
Oh, I don't disagree that the Canary is pure trash propaganda but I found it amusing that you consider the Eye a source worth quoting in an attack featuring a claim of bias.
Click to expand...

Why isn't it ?

IMO Private Eye is resolutely contrarian and as such isn't biased.
 
MikeG said:
True, but doesn't speak to the point I was making, which was that the Victorian Industrialists weren't always the villains they are painted.
Click to expand...

You are right, there were a handful of Victorian philanthropists, but then again they were far outnumbered by those who weren't so philanthropical and/or those whose philanthropy was financed by the ill-treatment of those people who worked to provide that wealth.

I know you're well informed but those who aren't cound just look at the accounts of ill-treatment of workers in the South Wales coalfields well into the 20th century to understand how far we have come - and how dangerous it may be to assume that employers can be trusted to look after workers' rights.
 
MikeG said:
Not in Britain, because Planning laws have changed dramatically. It requires legislation to get re-zoning of agricultural land on the necessary scale to build new towns. Private businesses are no longer able to buy up some farms and start building whatever they want. This is a good thing.
Click to expand...

I'd also argue that they by and large, employers lack motivation (though there are exceptions). We only hear of the worst in the news but employers who don't want to even provide a subsidised canteen - much less a defined benefits pension scheme - are unlikely to be willing to build a model village for their employees.
 
The Don said:
.........how dangerous it may be to assume that employers can be trusted to look after workers' rights.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything you have said in these three posts, The Don, but I would point out that there are no parties suggesting that employers be trusted with looking after their workers' rights. It may be on some political opponent's agenda, however, to suggest that this is what a win for the Tories would bring about.
 
MikeG said:
True, but doesn't speak to the point I was making, which was that the Victorian Industrialists weren't always the villains they are painted.
Click to expand...
No, but that is not the important point. Their domination of society led to systematic abuses. Not all Irish or Highland landowners in Victorian times were vile tyrants. So what? In general they abused the power they had over their tenants, and continued to do so until the tenants acquired adequate political rights.

If you want to stop being treated as a slave, don't wait in hope until god sends you a master who happens to be well disposed. He may well send you a worse one. Free yourself. Then get the right to vote. Then put pressure on the government. That's how to improve your lot.
 
Camillus said:
.......That means that by 2027 the fallout from Brexit will be thoroughly eating the Tories, who will have to shoulder the blame for everything (unless something very surprising happens), and a resurgent Labour party will have a chance at undoing some of the mess using a centre-Left approach with perhaps some good old state ownership of the essentials (trains, power, water) thrown in.

I might be a bit delusional but I live in hope.
Click to expand...

I don't think this delusional at all. If the Labour party survives the tumult following a rout at this election, it will have to reform itself utterly, or it will be replaced. Either option will lead to a centre-left party capable of winning seats in southern England outside London.
 
Craig B said:
No, but that is not the important point.....
Click to expand...

Au contraire my dear old thing......it is absolutely the important point in the circumstances in which I made it. The rest of your post is of course 100% correct.
 
Had to laugh at the BBC News ticker just now. Apparently UKIP is calling for a ban on 'ISLAMIC STATE SCHOOLS IN THE UK'. I presume that actually they're calling for a ban on 'ISLAMIC STATE-SCHOOLS' in the UK, not 'ISLAMIC-STATE SCHOOLS' in the UK, otherwise the situation is worse than I thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom