Absolutely so - but that's kind of my point, he got sunk by that even though pretty much everyone agreed he was a superb constituency MP - if anyone could have hoped to get a personal vote, it was him.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Absolutely so - but that's kind of my point, he got sunk by that even though pretty much everyone agreed he was a superb constituency MP - if anyone could have hoped to get a personal vote, it was him.
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
Because people were angry or disillusioned and had turned on his party or abstained, I don't see that as an inevitable consequence for all of these MPs, some yes, but not necessarily all. Some could benefit from gaining votes for the same reason the LDs lost them and they should keep their personal votes.Absolutely so - but that's kind of my point, he got sunk by that even though pretty much everyone agreed he was a superb constituency MP - if anyone could have hoped to get a personal vote, it was him.
I'm not saying they'll all keep their seats, far from it. But it's not foregone that many could, given the current climate.
The way I see it they have 5 potential pools of voters.
Personal votes.
Centrist Labour voters.
Centrist Tory voters.
Disaffected Lib Dem voters.
Hard Remainers.
Just the first 2 (depending on party defected from) could be enough to keep them in a seat. It will keep Coffey in imo.
Then there's further permutations in some constituencies, Soubry being a prime example, where she had a very small winning margin thanks to a mass migration of voters from UKIP to Labour.
By standing on a Remain platform, she could lose a lot of votes and yet increase her winning margin by pushing those voters back to UKIP or over to Farage's new party while decreasing both Labour and Tory voter numbers.
It's not as simple as people like to paint it.
Armchair Supporter
Well-Known Member
Not many people are, or want to be, centerist. It is a no man's land for undecisive flip flops.
Most people lean one way or the other. It is just the angle which is variable.
The reason that centerist parties traditionally don't do well, is because people become enamoured with the party of thier 1st vote and generally stick with that, (unless you have protest voting such as the callaghan/thatcher or Major/Blair elections)
Elections are won by swing voters who move from centre to left/right depending on the flavour of the day. For centerist parties to win elections, you have to have the core voters from the left or the right swinging and that obviously don't happen.
So, a vote for the centerist parties is a protest vote really. Nice in practice, but a waste.
What you see with this independant movement is MP's who are too centrist for the parties, and Parties who are not centrist enough for the MP's.
And Labour shooting itself in the electoral foot as usual.
Most people lean one way or the other. It is just the angle which is variable.
The reason that centerist parties traditionally don't do well, is because people become enamoured with the party of thier 1st vote and generally stick with that, (unless you have protest voting such as the callaghan/thatcher or Major/Blair elections)
Elections are won by swing voters who move from centre to left/right depending on the flavour of the day. For centerist parties to win elections, you have to have the core voters from the left or the right swinging and that obviously don't happen.
So, a vote for the centerist parties is a protest vote really. Nice in practice, but a waste.
What you see with this independant movement is MP's who are too centrist for the parties, and Parties who are not centrist enough for the MP's.
And Labour shooting itself in the electoral foot as usual.
Not many people are, or want to be, centerist. It is a no man's land for undecisive flip flops.
Most people lean one way or the other. It is just the angle which is variable.
The reason that centerist parties traditionally don't do well, is because people become enamoured with the party of thier 1st vote and generally stick with that, (unless you have protest voting such as the callaghan/thatcher or Major/Blair elections)
Elections are won by swing voters who move from centre to left/right depending on the flavour of the day. For centerist parties to win elections, you have to have the core voters from the left or the right swinging and that obviously don't happen.
So, a vote for the centerist parties is a protest vote really. Nice in practice, but a waste.
What you see with this independant movement is MP's who are too centrist for the parties, and Parties who are not centrist enough for the MP's.
And Labour shooting itself in the electoral foot as usual.
I’d argue Centrist parties do better as they can claim both votes from both sides.
Blair had everyone from all areas voting for him.
I’m left of centre but closer to moderate Tories than McDonnell so the rest of your post is correct.
Centrism is the politics of the reasonable and grown up.
Because people were angry or disillusioned and had turned on his party or abstained, I don't see that as an inevitable consequence for all of these MPs, some yes, but not necessarily all. Some could benefit from gaining votes for the same reason the LDs lost them and they should keep their personal votes.
I'm not saying they'll all keep their seats, far from it. But it's not foregone that many could, given the current climate.
The way I see it they have 5 potential pools of voters.
Personal votes.
Centrist Labour voters.
Centrist Tory voters.
Disaffected Lib Dem voters.
Hard Remainers.
Just the first 2 (depending on party defected from) could be enough to keep them in a seat. It will keep Coffey in imo.
Then there's further permutations in some constituencies, Soubry being a prime example, where she had a very small winning margin thanks to a mass migration of voters from UKIP to Labour.
By standing on a Remain platform, she could lose a lot of votes and yet increase her winning margin by pushing those voters back to UKIP or over to Farage's new party while decreasing both Labour and Tory voter numbers.
It's not as simple as people like to paint it.
I wouldn't say anything is inevitable, but as I say, I remain sceptical. It doesn't mean I won't be wrong, but it does mean that my view is that youre being over-optimistic on their behalf. Only time will tell though.
happyman
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 761
- Team supported
- manchester city
Not many people are, or want to be, centerist. It is a no man's land for undecisive flip flops.
Most people lean one way or the other. It is just the angle which is variable.
The reason that centerist parties traditionally don't do well, is because people become enamoured with the party of thier 1st vote and generally stick with that, (unless you have protest voting such as the callaghan/thatcher or Major/Blair elections)
Elections are won by swing voters who move from centre to left/right depending on the flavour of the day. For centerist parties to win elections, you have to have the core voters from the left or the right swinging and that obviously don't happen.
So, a vote for the centerist parties is a protest vote really. Nice in practice, but a waste.
What you see with this independant movement is MP's who are too centrist for the parties, and Parties who are not centrist enough for the MP's.
And Labour shooting itself in the electoral foot as usual.
It's not really a centrist party and it's far from independent, in reality it's just a silly attempt at trying to stop Brexit which isn't going to work. Apart from the virtue signalling they've been up to they have the nerve to say they're independent which they very much aren't.
If they ever archived their goal of stopping Brexit they'll slither off into a cushy HOL position or onto the back benches of the party they left very soon after.
I’d argue Centrist parties do better as they can claim both votes from both sides.
Blair had everyone from all areas voting for him.
I’m left of centre but closer to moderate Tories than McDonnell so the rest of your post is correct.
Centrism is the politics of the reasonable and grown up.
That's totally true, but the historical evidence is that is the centre right or centre left in principle rather than a separate entity that specifically states its centrism. Not just here either, it tends to go that way in most democracies. Now, you can get a fundamental paradigm shift, such as Labour supplanting the Liberals a hundred years ago, and who knows, that could happen here. But the danger of being squeezed is certainly there.
Armchair Supporter
Well-Known Member
I’d argue Centrist parties do better as they can claim both votes from both sides.
Blair had everyone from all areas voting for him.
I’m left of centre but closer to moderate Tories than McDonnell so the rest of your post is correct.
Centrism is the politics of the reasonable and grown up.
Blair was voted in because he was the 1st real option against a utterly dreadful tory government awash with scandal and incompetance.
Adolf himself would have voted for Blair in that election lol.
I don't believe identifying with an specific party is unreasonable or immature, quite the opposite tbh and quite natural.
I don't believe identifying with an specific party is unreasonable or immature, quite the opposite tbh and quite natural.
Not sure choosing between having a leg cut off or an arm cut off is "identifying" with a party tbf.