Post Match Thread: Election 2017

[cibaman]

I am sure you are right. As I say, I mentioned it only half tongue-in-cheek.

I do wonder how some of the Labour centrist MPs are feeling this morning though? Pleasantly pleased and surprised, or monumentally pissed off.

Their careers are effectively over unless they are willing to completely abandon their principles, integrity and credibility and support policies they clearly do not believe in. I expect many of them will be leaving parliament to pursue other interests.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Use the search facility and see that everyone said that seven years ago as well.

Everyone repeating it is starting to sound like the scousers "next year is our year"

It's really not the same thing though. In 2010 the coalition had 363 seats between them and there was a formal arrangement. This one has 328 and no formal agreement. Any time 6 of her MP's vote against anything she loses, anytime she says no to the unionists, she loses. Not only that, if any six fall ill, miss their train or go on holiday, she loses.

 

[Chippy_boy]

So what? This is all noises off.

Politics is being re-set, from now on the opposition will be different from the government, not a mirror image of it. That's a good thing, otherwise it's Tweedledee or Tweedledum forever and people are sick of it.

I am not sure that your personal conclusion that the party will decide that this defeat was a good result and therefore to carry as before, is yet proven?

 

[SWP's back]

Not really. As a labour voter, i'm not sure another election with a better Tory leader would have a great outcome from my perspective so it's not something i'm necessarily hoping will happen. If I were a Tory i'd want a new leader and another election asap. It looks like this voting block might only have a majority of two and a significant number of Tories want May out. It's very hard to see it lasting 5 years. I think they'll really struggle to get much done at all in the next couple of years. I mean they can hardly count on Ken Clarke, so we're already down to one. Having to sacrifice their hard Brexit to go into a partnership with the DUP when it gives very little guarantee they can push through their agenda hardly seems worth it.

Would also add, they may have underestimated the level of opposition this deal with DUP will face. It's a step too far for many.

There's a difference between ousting May which I think will happen and having another general election which I don't think will happen.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Ed Miliband was not a centrist ffs

What?

 

[SWP's back]

Because he fought in a three party system where the Lib Dems got 5 million votes.

If New Labour were invented today with Blair at it's helm, he would have walked the election. I'm fact he might have gotten 18 million votes

I voted him first chance I had so you're preaching to the converted. I'm just saying his vote share was only 1% higher than May received last night which is accurate.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

This is the point. May was one of the more centrist Tory leaders until she put out a stunningly stupid manifesto and dodged debates.

If she'd have stuck to her guns we'd still be talking a 100 seat majority. Saying centrist politics always wins shouldn't even be that controversial, it's common sense

No you wouldn't. I have three kids aged between 18 and 23 ........i have never ever seen them so motivated so politically aware ... the last few weeks have all been about politics and yesterday they all voted for the first time. They all voted labour... despite their mums efforts.

Times are changing and our kids will sort a country that cares for its people in the future rather than a country that is run by people who just want to line their own pockets

 

[The perfect fumble]

I am not sure that your personal conclusion that the party will decide that this defeat was a good result and therefore to carry as before, is yet proven?

You do my head in, look at the labour party today! Look at the membership! The MPs, the media coverage, this is everything Labour supporters could have hoped for short of victory and victory was never a real possibility.

 

[geoff clipp]

There's a difference between ousting May which I think will happen and having another general election which I don't think will happen.

Just can't believe taking charge of a minority government propped up by that shower is that much of an attractive prospect. Especially when they absolutely won't allow the hard brexit many of the heir apparents want. No need to get too bogged down in arguing about it though as we'll just see for ourselves.

 

[SWP's back]

It's really not the same thing though. In 2010 the coalition had 363 seats between them and there was a formal arrangement. This one has 328 and no formal agreement. Any time 6 of her MP's vote against anything she loses, anytime she says no to the unionists, she loses. Not only that, if any six fall ill, miss their train or go on holiday, she loses.

You're ignoring the fact SF never take their seats in that but I don't understand your point.

 

[Magicpole]

Oh yeah, the DUP are utter shits and they'll demand a heavy price for their support.

But there's a lot of common ground with the Tories, this cosy relationship was stitched up very quickly.

The DUP are just 19th century Tories.

17th

 

[Gabriel]

Nope. No election till after the boundary change in 2018. That means after Brexit too.
Not sure May will remain as Prime Minister though. The meeting of the new 1922 committee next week could be extremely brutal. The Tories do tend to indulge in Regicide on perceived failure.
Whoever becomes leader - probably David Davis - will have a lot going for them if they move the Party to the left to be "One Nation Tories" again. Especially if facing the unelectable Corbyn who let's be honest won't be going anywhere unless he sees the problem many voters have with him.

The question of mandate would dog any new leader, just as it did with May, which would surely necessitate another election, and it's very difficult to see how such an arrangement as has been presented can endure given the circumstances.

 

[SWP's back]

Times are changing and our kids will sort a country that cares for its people in the future rather than a country that is run by people who just want to line their own pockets

Or they will grow up and start moving to the right as normally happens.

 

[hilts]

I don't think a lot voters or MPs match to their parties very well any more, I think devolution, brexit and austerity have blurred the lines too much

 

[SWP's back]

You do my head in, look at the labour party today! Look at the membership! The MPs, the media coverage, this is everything Labour supporters could have hoped for short of victory and victory was never a real possibility.

Why? Why wasn't it a possibility? Why are you celebrating a defeat and five more years in opposition?

 

[SWP's back]

The question of mandate would dog any new leader, just as it did with May, which would surely necessitate another election, and it's very difficult to see how such an arrangement as has been presented can endure given the circumstances.

McDonnel said himself last night that May had the mandate and to say she didn't was ridiculous.

So which is it?

 

[cibaman]

Nope. No election till after the boundary change in 2018. That means after Brexit too.
Not sure May will remain as Prime Minister though. The meeting of the new 1922 committee next week could be extremely brutal. The Tories do tend to indulge in Regicide on perceived failure.
Whoever becomes leader - probably David Davis - will have a lot going for them if they move the Party to the left to be "One Nation Tories" again. Especially if facing the unelectable Corbyn who let's be honest won't be going anywhere unless he sees the problem many voters have with him.

In 2003 Howard took over from Duncan Smith in an unopposed election. I expect the 1922 Committee will be busy sounding out MPs to see if there is a candidate who they would all be prepared to support. If they can ditch May without a contested election they will, but I just dont see them putting brexit on hold again while they fight out an internal election. If there's no unifying candidate then I expect May will get a temporary reprieve.

 

[Toney’s bookie]

This is the point. May was one of the more centrist Tory leaders until she put out a stunningly stupid manifesto and dodged debates.

If she'd have stuck to her guns we'd still be talking a 100 seat majority. Saying centrist politics always wins shouldn't even be that controversial, it's common sense

Exactly. Either May or her advisors decided it was a foregone conclusion that they would win a big majority and decided to stick things in the manifesto that they knew would be unpopular but they wanted to use this opportunity to drive through - fox hunting for example. I mean ffs, all that's going on in the world and they decided that re-introducing fox hunting was worth even mentioning in the campaign. They offered nothing to make people look forward to the future, just more corporate style 'cost cutting' governance where the majority of people would be screwed. I started this election campaign without a question that I would vote tory. They totally drove me away with their miserable campaign and to give Corbyn credit his manifesto may have been overly optimistic but at least it was optimistic and you could accept he genuinely believed in what he was proposing and that it was for people's benefit rather than just reeling off soundbites from strategists.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Why? Why wasn't it a possibility? Why are you celebrating a defeat and five more years in opposition?

Because the party was never in a position to win this election for reasons that are screamingly obvious.

 

[Chippy_boy]

No you wouldn't. I have three kids aged between 18 and 23 ........i have never ever seen them so motivated so politically aware ... the last few weeks have all been about politics and yesterday they all voted for the first time. They all voted labour... despite their mums efforts.

Times are changing and our kids will sort a country that cares for its people in the future rather than a country that is run by people who just want to line their own pockets

Kids are always idealists. If someone tells you you can have free education, better public services and no downsides whatsoever, anyone would vote for it, provided they thought it was deliverable. Kids don't remember the days when these things were promised and not delivered; they are not cynical like the rest of us, after decades of real-world underperformance.

Corbyn bought off half of them with his £28,000 bribe of no university fees, and played the soclal media card (for which he should be congratulated, btw) extremely well. The other point is I wonder how many young people were driven to vote after the Brexit result went against their wishes. That may have boosted their numbers too.

But its premature I think to assume that they are now energised and enthuastic hard-left supporters who will turn up in numbers, with the same views, in perpetuity.