They could have announced just about anything in their manifesto and they’d have taken a big majority. It was one of those once in a life time opportunities to get a mandate for anything they wanted.It would have decimated their support last night if they had.
I agree with you but that was never going to happen.
This is kind of like when people try to work out what the Premier League table would be like without VAR though. The fact that it exists and makes a decision affects how the teams approach the rest of the game. Same with this. If we've learned anything from this election, it's that the Lib Dems are far better strategists that the bunch of amateurs that are Reform.Just done a quick calculation on vote share versus seats won, and translated that into how many seats each major party would've won under 'pure' PR (i.e., percentage vote = number of seats).
FPTP
Labour 411
Con 121
Reform 4
LibDem 71
PR
Labour 219
Con 154
Reform 93
LD 79
Or get elected and have no responsibility to deliver anything, which is the option they took.They could have announced just about anything in their manifesto and they’d have taken a big majority. It was one of those once in a life time opportunities to get a mandate for anything they wanted.
Not so sure it would. Might have decimated the Liberals though.It would have decimated their support last night if they had.
I agree with you but that was never going to happen.
You're right of course, plus there's no guarantee that Reform votes came solely from people who would otherwise have voted Conservative.This is kind of like when people try to work out what the Premier League table would be like without VAR though. The fact that it exists and makes a decision affects how the teams approach the rest of the game. Same with this. If we've learned anything from this election, it's that the Lib Dems are far better strategists that the bunch of amateurs that are Reform.
PR would almost certainly increase the turnout, as people are more able to positively vote for what they wanted. So many people don't vote because they only have a realistic choice of two parties they don't like. The Lib Dems and other smaller parties would almost certainly see an increase in votes under PR. Reform is harder to judge, because this time they've arguably acted as a protest for people who are right wing but are fed up with the Tories. We've seen in the past these far right parties ebb and flow based on what's happening at the time.
Not everyone's cup of tea, but I like her and as you say great to see someone from unpriviliged background do well in politics.Proud as punch watch a northern working class person from a council estate walking into one of the top political jobs in the UK.
Well done Angela Raynor and good luck.
Well we both know you deliberately swerved my question.Swerve from what? Fella hasn’t even started and he is already being criticised for the most stupid thing.
As I say, criticise him for how he runs the country, not what make of car he is picked up in.
Only on blue moon
Thanks. I only looked at the numbers for the major parties.
Interesting that PR works fine in the majority of governments round the world. But it will never change in the UK as Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.Just done a quick calculation on vote share versus seats won, and translated that into how many seats each major party would've won under 'pure' PR (i.e., percentage vote = number of seats).
FPTP
Labour 411
Con 121
Reform 4
LibDem 71
PR
Labour 219
Con 154
Reform 93
LD 79
So under PR you'd maybe have the right-wing of the Tory party collaborating with Reform and the majority Labour government having to rely on the LibDems for support. As we saw in 2010, when the LibDems made a huge mistake in committing to a coalition, that doesn't make for good government.
The other what-if factor was that Reform was second in 9i constituencies. I might do the maths later for individual seats but let's assume that in 74 of those the Reform vote made the difference between the Tories losing and winning, and that 50 of those went to Labour, and 24 to Lib Dems. Assuming negligible Reform support, or no Reform at all, that would have made the final result (bar the 2 missing results):
Labour 326
Con 196
Lib Dem 53
Corrected - So the barest Labour overall majority of one.
Talking of Schools my Daughter is in the same class as Angela's son.Same school as me....and Phil Foden!
Feel exactly the same. So refreshing to have someone of that background making it big on the political stage, and any snob that frowns upon her precisely because of her background can go and jump off a cliff.Proud as punch watch a northern working class person from a council estate walking into one of the top political jobs in the UK.
Well done Angela Raynor and good luck.
I doubt anyone at Jag Land Rover cared. They probably didn't even notice. And even if they did, genuinely what difference does it make? What's next, proscribing penne al forno at meal times?I bet nearly every person working at Jaguar Land-rover saw him arriving in that Audi and thought the same as me.
I specificly said it was not a major issue, if you had read my initial post you would have seen that?I doubt anyone at Jag Land Rover cared. They probably didn't even notice. And even if they did, genuinely what difference does it make? What's next, proscribing penne al forno at meal times?
Starmer will rightly be under the microscope from day one, for serious things. This isn't a serious thing; at all.
Rayner's not the chancellor. It's Rachel Reeves.I have quite a lot in common with Rayner, in upbringing, education, and profession, so am quite proud of her becoming the first female chancellor in UK history.
I hope she is given the backing and resources to actually mitigate the abject ineptitude of the last decade and a half, to everyone’s benefit, whether they voted Labour or not.
Cheers, I meant Reeves, and fixed my post. Didn’t sleep much last night so have crossed thoughts a few times today.Rayner's not the chancellor. It's Rachel Reeves.
Just popped in to see my mum and dad, mother reckons rayner's a trollop :-)Feel exactly the same. So refreshing to have someone of that background making it big on the political stage, and any snob that frowns upon her precisely because of her background can go and jump off a cliff.
Im not swerving, I'm deliberately not responding to what is a stupid crtiticismWell we both know you deliberately swerved my question.
Perhaps you should read my initial post before you jump to conclusions.
Mind the bannister son