Post Match Thread: Election 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.
[QUOTE="Damocles, post: 10260877, member: 1

I'm furious we've lost an election [/QUOTE]

What in your opinion was the cause
 
[QUOTE="Damocles, post: 10260877, member: 1

I'm furious we've lost an election

What in your opinion was the cause[/QUOTE]

The same reason why every single election in history is lost - the Party didn't convince the electorate about their viability to firm a Government
 
The criticism of the Government's austerity policies are obviously implied, and I've been criticising right wing politics for 15 years give or take.

What I'm not doing is seeing we've failed the electorate who expect us to help them and then cheering about it.

I'm furious we've lost an election. I seem to be the few on here who is. This tells its own story on the current state of Labour and how much these Momentum folks give a shit about the working classes
Fair enough. I get it now.
 
We have a turnover tax already. It's called VAT.
No thats paid by the people when they buy stuff.
This would be paid by MultiNational Corporations or companies with a high level of turnover and would take into account basic profitability factors for the size and market type of the company (Calculable by the ONS) and direct investment in a business on the balance sheet.
It would work in combination with corporation tax and would be deductible from the calculated corporation tax till the result is zero. The goal being to make a company pay a minimum floor rate of ta as a proportion of their UK turnover. It would be designed to stop companies minimising tax by various mechanisms including
-> Inter-Company Loans.
-> Royalty Payments To A Sister-Company in a Low Tax Country.
-> Accentuation of Past Loses (Deductible from profits).
-> Buying Stuff From Sister-Companies In a Lower Tax Country.
(the following video gives a good explanation of the first three major types of tax avoidance)
Starbucks: http://moneyweek.com/videos/why-does-starbucks-pay-so-little-tax-61302/

A big hole has to be made in the yearly tax avoidance figure of nearly £3bn
 
Last edited:
I don't despise the left, I'm an active part of it you clown. What I despise are people who want to "wait for the right Government".

I think you're not only arrogant but infinitely worse than this you're cruel. You dare to tell the disadvantaged, the underprivileged and those in poverty that you're fighting for them while purposely serving up policy that you KNOW will never be electable. Rather than attempting to help them, you tell them that they can only be helped on YOUR terms, when the ideology is right for YOU. It's disgusting. Grotesque. A act of vindictive evilness to give hope to the suffering when you have no intention of honouring it. No intention of compromise so that they can live in a little less discomfort. It's always all about you lot and your special little principles that are SO moral that everybody else has to wait and instead heat their houses with the warm glow of your ethical smugness.

If a Tory Government lines up tomorrow that will fund public services to a world class degree, pursue a progressive social agenda and invest in downtrodden communities infrastructure then I'd vote for them in a heartbeat. I'd vote for pretty much any party in the world who would do that. Because it's not about me, not about handwringing about tie colours.

Because it's about making the people who are fucked, less fucked and doing it right now instead of "waiting for the right Government". All of your lot on the far left are a bunch of jumped up self righteous tossers. You are fucking useless to me.

what are you not getting ... the posters arguing there case want a socialist/left wing government because they believe only a socialist/left wing government can help the underprivileged and those in poverty - if a tory-light clone comes into power under the name 'Labour' it doesn't mean to these people arguing there point that the poor will be helped
 
The criticism of the Government's austerity policies are obviously implied, and I've been criticising right wing politics for 15 years give or take.

What I'm not doing is seeing we've failed the electorate who expect us to help them and then cheering about it.

I'm furious we've lost an election. I seem to be the few on here who is. This tells its own story on the current state of Labour and how much these Momentum folks give a shit about the working classes
I'm not sure you're being entirely fair. Given the position they started from numerically, given the personal attacks on Corbyn and the infighting over his leadership, given the impact of UKIP in 2015, a win was always highly unlikely, if not impossible. Think of it like the 1992 election where Kinnock failed to beat the solid but uninspiring Major. He made some gains but it was 1997 when after 5 years of the Tories tearing themselves apart, Blair swept them out of power. I'm sure Blair's personality played some part but I reckon Brown would also have won that election had he been leader. John Smith was no Blair but he would have won easily as well. As I said before, Corbyn should be looking to promote an electable successor who will carry forward his policies.
 
Being a sad bastard, I've looked at every result and categorised those where there was a UKIP candidate in 2015 and the result was either close (vote shares within 5% or so) or the seat changed hands.
  • There were 36 seats won by the Tories, of which 6 involved a gain
  • There were 33 seats won by Labour of which 21 involved a gain.
  • There were 2 won by the Lib Dems, both gains
  • There were 2 won by Plaid Cymru of which 1 was a gain.
So statistically Matt Singh might be right but Labour were the winners in terms of seats won due to the UKIP collapse. There were some interesting individual results in there that caught my eye; the wonderfully named Penistone saw virtually all the UKIP vote go to the Tories but Labour hung on. In Pendle on the other hand, it went virtually all to Labour but the Tories clung on. Southport was another interesting one where it seems UKIP's vote all went to Labour but the Lib Dem vote fell and the Tories were the beneficiary, coming from second place in 2015 to take the seat. But in Waveney in Suffolk, which was quite close in 2015, all the UKIP vote went to the Tories.

Of course it's all just guesswork to a degree as there's no way of knowing how every individual voted in the 2 elections.
Sad bastard ;-)

I find the results interesting too, all over the country, and I think the graphic tells a big story about the regional differences, and in some cases even individual local results tell a differing story, but the SE is a huge change towards labour, and UKIP weren't overly popular in London to start with, but its still a big shift to labour anyway, and in many seats May targetted a few weeks ago. Even my own constituency, one of the most conservative in the country (@14500 majority this time) the serving MP actually increased his vote, but there was still a substantial swing towards labour. Its been conservative since 1923 by the way.
 
Actually if you bother to have a proper look, without jumping in all guns blazing, you might see some trends in there, particularly London and the SE, often the tory heartland, its a far bigger shift than in other areas of England, especially the north of England, considered a labour heartland in general. Remember London and the SE weren't generally in favour of leaving the EU either, so its not only the UKIP share of the vote that moved.

Its a really interesting graphic on the shift between the two parties, and it doesn't take into account any other party, even in Scotland.

The real reason for the shift was not austerity, or length of time in power, imho, it was an inept decision to have an election in the first place, at a difficult time for the country, followed by an inept campaign, and from the starting position they started with, its a bloody great surprise they made such a mess of it.

I think its unlikely that labour will be able to sustain that position long term in London and the SE, so from a labour point of view in the region, it could be as good as it gets.

Fair enough, I'd agree with all of that, and sorry for being "touchy". Quite the worst election campaign in living memory, for sure.
 
Sad bastard ;-)

I find the results interesting too, all over the country, and I think the graphic tells a big story about the regional differences, and in some cases even individual local results tell a differing story, but the SE is a huge change towards labour, and UKIP weren't overly popular in London to start with, but its still a big shift to labour anyway, and in many seats May targetted a few weeks ago. Even my own constituency, one of the most conservative in the country (@14500 majority this time) the serving MP actually increased his vote, but there was still a substantial swing towards labour. Its been conservative since 1923 by the way.

The only thing I'd disagree with is this concept of a "big shift". In 2010, Labour won 258 seats. In 2015, they won 232 seats. In 2017 they won 262 seats.

A gain of 30 seats is nice, and particularly so when it was contrary to expectations. Before the election was called, they were expecting to lose as many as 100 seats, so gaining any at all, was contrary to expectations.

But a "big shift"? I don't think so. Restoring them to the level at which Gordon Brown lost an election is nothing to write home about. And in fact the opposition gaining 30 seats off an incumbent government, might be considered the bare minimum you'd reasonably expect.

In 1979, Margaret Thatcher gained 63 seats with an 8% swing.

In 1997, Blair *gained* 145 seats, with a 9% swing.

These were big shifts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.