General Election - 4th July 2024

[Stoned Rose]

Not likely to change and are the rules that politicians are happy to participate in.

Fuck me I know mate. I’m just saying it’s a shit system.

 

[mosssideblue]

View attachment 124539

What a bunch of Fuckwhits

 

[bluenova]

I think there's one point that a lot are overlooking when they say things like "Starmer got a worse vote share than Corbyn in 2017" - which is true. But there's a reason Corbyn lost.

Let's be honest, the voters permitted Starmer to win. Implicitly, they didn't mobilise to vote against him. They didn't deem him enough of a threat to vote efficiently in opposition - that might not be an endorsement but it is an acceptance. That wasn't the case for Corbyn. People stacked up on the Tories with unprecedented weight specifically to stop him.

So while only a third of the electorate voted for Labour, I think it's fair to say that another 15-30% were somewhere between apathetic about a Labour victory and voting another party to ensure one. Whereas clearly 75% were working actively against the Conservatives which is why they lost.

FPTP creates the perception of binary support when actually it's more nuanced. It is often more about who most of the electorate allow to win rather than who they want to win. I hate it as a system, but the truth is that the voters let Cameron in with 36% in 2010 and now it's the same with Starmer. In FPTP the electorate acts more like a gatekeeper.

We need to fix FPTP, but I'm not suddenly going to promote some new urgency to the topic just because it's the other side of the spectrum that has benefited on this occasion. It's been a problem for decades.

It's a pointless comparison. That election had the LDs still in the post-coalition lull, no Farage, as the Leave voters thought they'd won, and ended up with the highest combined Tory/Lab vote for 50 years.

Corbyn did brilliantly well that campaign, but any comments about his vote share have to come with the caveat that Theresa May, turned out to be a weird robot, ran an awful campaign, and u-turned on her biggest announcement within days.

Yet she still got the highest Tory vote since Thatcher's 1983 landslide.

This election had four main parties, and Labour ruthlessly targeted Tory seats - the whole point being that they didn't pile up votes in seats where they were likely to win, but spread them out to make the most of FPTP.

 

[Georgian Maestro]

Makes loads of sense that, mate.

You are not taking into account the significant numbers of voters who are not aligned to one political party and those who vote tactically. It's not like supporting a football team, it can be much more fluid than that. I know a person who was torn between Labour and Green but in the end voted Green because she lives in an ultra safe Labour seat and wanted Greens to take a bigger share of the popular vote. My personal political views are somewhere between Labour and Lib Dem but I voted Labour because Lib Dem would have been a wasted vote in Altrincham and Sale West.
I also know a Labour supporter who voted Lib Dem in his constituency because it would have been a wasted vote otherwise. The key tactic for many voters was simply to get the tories out.

 

[jimharri]

So while only a third of the electorate voted for Labour, I think it's fair to say that another 15-30% were somewhere between apathetic about a Labour victory and voting another party to ensure one. Whereas clearly 75% were working actively against the Conservatives which is why they lost.

That's sort of what I said earlier. The election was more about getting the Conservatives out, than it was getting Labour in. One third of the vote, in the lowest turnout in 20 years, is certainly not a ringing endorsement for Labour. Even the most enthusiastic Labour supporters on here wouldn't pretend otherwise.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

That's sort of what I said earlier. The election was more about getting the Conservatives out, than it was getting Labour in. One third of the vote, in the lowest turnout in 20 years, is certainly not a ringing endorsement for Labour. Even the most enthusiastic Labour supporters on here wouldn't pretend otherwise.

I think you'll find they would

 

[jimharri]

I think you'll find they would

Well then, they're kidding themselves.

 

[Eccles Blue]

Until you get 100% turn out, the voting system will never be right. For all we know, the c40% who never voted on Thursday may well have voted Labour had they turned out

Unfortunately we will never know. I hesitate to call out people who didn't vote because as the old saying goes, walk a mile in my shoes, so there could be very valid reasons why they couldn't/wouldn't vote but I can see the time coming when the powers that be say, well people can't be bothered voting so we won't bother having elections. They must be satisfied!!!!

 

[Postman Pep]

I think you'll find they would

Can't believe they are not taking on board the views of experts on the matter :)

 

[Eccles Blue]

Absolutely not, everyone has the right to vote but it doesn't mean they have to nor should they.

Then they should also have the right not to complain when they don't like a government initiative!! JMHO

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

That's sort of what I said earlier. The election was more about getting the Conservatives out, than it was getting Labour in. One third of the vote, in the lowest turnout in 20 years, is certainly not a ringing endorsement for Labour. Even the most enthusiastic Labour supporters on here wouldn't pretend otherwise.

Having said all that, I wonder what the majority would have been had the Israel/Palastine conflict nit being a factor.

The result is history now and I’m sure most are aware that this 170 majority could be flipped just as the Tory one was within 5 years.

It’s up to the government to show they deserve that majority now. If they don’t, then they’ll be voted out.

 

[kaz7]

Beth rigby is the female simon stone , first questions, inane and negative , trying to force starmer into promises for the first 100 days, oh and low vote share , stfu , she has been at it for two days already

 

[bluenova]

I think you'll find they would

I've not seen much of that. Ultimately they won, and won big, by doing exactly what they said the plan was : To spread out their vote by appealing to Tory voters, and making sure that 2019 Tory voters weren't scared of a Labour government.

It meant that the Labour base wasn't enthused, but you only get one little X, and no matter how enthusiastic you are, it doesn't make that count any more.

When I was knocking on doors in 2017, people were excited and enthusiastic, but Theresa May still ended up with about the same amount of votes that Thatcher did in her 1983 landslide. Labour piling up enthusiastic votes in seats they were always going to win meant they lost.

 

[jimharri]

Having said all that, I wonder what the majority would have been had the Israel/Palastine conflict nit being a factor.

The result is history now and I’m sure most are aware that this 170 majority could be flipped just as the Tory one was within 5 years.

It’s up to the government to show they deserve that majority now. If they don’t, then they’ll be voted out.

I'd say, no chance. Well; okay, not no chance. But the chances of Labour being kicked out at the next election are negligible. There'd have to be the mother of all fuck ups by Labour on education, health, public transport, immigration etc etc for the great unwashed to even consider voting the Conservatives (let's be honest, the only realistic opposition) back into government. They're about as popular as a fart in a lift right now. Hence my view about last thursday being more about getting them out, rather than Labour in.

 

[BobKowalski]

Having said all that, I wonder what the majority would have been had the Israel/Palastine conflict nit being a factor.

The result is history now and I’m sure most are aware that this 170 majority could be flipped just as the Tory one was within 5 years.

It’s up to the government to show they deserve that majority now. If they don’t, then they’ll be voted out.

Not sure that it will. Botched deal with the EU/Brexit, pandemic, war in Ukraine, 3 PM’s - one cosplaying a lettuce - mad schemes, zero governing competence and diseases in the water supply and all in the last five years.

Labour will have to top that and then some to lose a 170 majority in one term. Reduced, yes but not flipped.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Not sure that it will. Botched deal with the EU/Brexit, pandemic, war in Ukraine, 3 PM’s - one cosplaying a lettuce - mad schemes, zero governing competence and diseases in the water supply and all in the last five years.

Labour will have to top that and then some to lose a 170 majority in one term. Reduced, yes but not flipped.

If I were them though, I’d be drilling it into them that it is possible. Keep as many on the straight and narrow as possible and serve the country as best they can.

Obviously power always corrupts and whoever falls into that trap will need binning as soon as they’re found out.

 

[hilts]

Then they should also have the right not to complain when they don't like a government initiative!! JMHO

I agree unless their preferred political stance isn't represented in their area. Remember though I wasn't replying to someone who said they shouldn't complain.

They wanted them struck off which made me laugh:-)

 

[Eccles Blue]

I agree unless their preferred political stance isn't represented in their area. Remember though I wasn't replying to someone who said they shouldn't complain.

They wanted them struck off which made me laugh:-)

Yes, I was sort of doing an overriding response, not just to yours but (holds hands up) I was being lazy and not looking for the one you were replying to, Sorry. :-)

I did notice on the results when the returning officer was reading out the numbers there seemed to be a lot more 'spoiled papers' this time than usual. Quite a number in the 100s. Although I must admit, much as I love him, I was getting annoyed with Clive Myrie speaking over them when it came to how many were ruined!!

I once did a huge cross right across all candidates in a local election a few years ago because there was only Labour and Tory and I wouldn't vote Tory and the Labour (who was bound to get in it being a Greater Manchester not Salford ward) was a stupid man and very lazy! (IMO) :-)

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Just seen that Starmer secured half a million less votes that Corbyn did in 2019! Wow. Despite winning a huge majority it's hardly a ringing endorsement. Our political system is very weird at times.

 

[Eccles Blue]

Just seen that Starmer secured half a million less votes that Corbyn did in 2019! Wow. Despite winning a huge majority it's hardly a ringing endorsement. Our political system is very weird at times.

But, apart from the Reform *washes mouth out* winning seats it worked this time.




Apologies to anyone who voted for the R people but I'm sorry I detest them nearly as much as the Tories...... I used not to let people know who I supported politically but now I'm getting too old to care. *lol*